Columbia  ©nttjer^^ftp 

THE  LIBRARIES 


SAINT    AUGUSTINE 
OF    CANTERBURY 


;  .UX^m&mi     |&(f^f^?5>^vg)^y^^feygxcxp) 


[FVcv--,-  c-a-i 


Miniatures  from  the  C.C.C.  M.S.,  Cambridge,  No.  2S6,  the  so-called 

St.  Augustine's  Gospels. 

Fro>i/isJ>/ece. 


THE  BIRTH   OF  THE  ENGLISH  CHURCH 

SAINT   AUGUSTINE 
OF   CANTERBURY 


BY  Sir  henry  H.  HOWORTH 

K.C.I.E.,  Hon.  D.C.L.  (Durham),  F.R.S.,  F.S.A.,  Etc.  Etc. 

PRESIDENT    OF    THE    ROV.    ARCH.     INST.     AND    THB    ROY.     NUMISMATIC   SOCIETY 

AUTHOR   OF 

"SAINT  GREGORY  THE  GREAT"  ETC.  ETC. 


WITH    ILLUSTRATIONS 
MAPS,  TABLES  AND   APPENDICES 


NEW  YORK 
E.    P.   BUTTON   AND   COMPANY 

1913 


^  3T . 4^ 
\4  ?4-S2-. 


15-2' '' 


TO 

PROFESSOR  WILLIAM  BRIGHT 

AND 

BISHOP  BROWNE  OF  BRISTOL 

I  WISH  to  associate  the  following  pages  with  the  names 
of  two  English  scholars  who  have  done  much  to 
illuminate  the  beginnings  of  English  Church  history, 
and  to  light  my  own  feet  in  the  dark  and  unpaved 
paths  across  that  difficult  landscape.  I  have  extolled 
their  works  in  my  Introduction,  and  I  now  take  off 
my  hat  to  them  in  a  more  formal  way.  An  author's 
debts  can  often  only  be  paid  by  acknowledgment  and 
gratitude. 


PREFACE 

In  writing  a  previous  work  dedicated  to  the  life  of 
Saint  Gregory  I  purposely  omitted  one  of  the  most 
dramatic  events  in  his  career — namely,  the  mission 
he  sent  to  Britain  to  evangelise  these  islands.  My 
purpose  in  writing  that  work  was  not  to  publish  a 
minute  and  complete  monograph  of  the  great  Pope. 
That  had  already  been  done  in  a  much  larger  book 
by  Mr.  Dudden, —  but  to  give  an  account  of  him 
such  as  would  enable  my  readers  to  understand  what 
manner  of  man  it  was  who  first  conceived  the  notion 
of  sending  a  Christian  mission  to  the  English  race  ; 
what  were  the  surroundings  in  which  he  lived ; 
what  was  the  position  he  filled  in  the  drama  of 
European  politics  at  the  beginning  of  the  seventh 
century  ;  what  was  the  nature  of  the  administrative 
changes  he  effected  ;  how  he  governed  the  Church 
and  its  possessions ;  how  he  dealt  with  the  secular 
rulers  of  Europe ;  what  was  his  mental  attitude 
towards  the  great  theological  problems  of  his  day 
and  how  he  affected  the  future  history  of  thouo-ht, 
especially  of  religious  thought.  To  give,  in  fact,  in 
sufficient  detail  and  with  as  complete  accuracy  as  I 
could  command,  a  picture  of  the  Man  and  the  Pope 
\vhose  scholars  and  whose  friends    were    the    first 


viii  PREFACE 

missionaries  to  the  English  race,  and  who  brought 
with  them  what  he  had  taught  them.  That  work 
I  meant  to  be  the  foundation-stone  for  a  further 
volume  in  which  the  story  of  the  Pope's  English 
mission  should  be  told  as  completely  as  I  could  tell  it. 
This  volume  I  now  offer  as  a  victim  to  my  critics. 

I  feel,  as  I  have  always  felt,  that  these  islands 
are,  both  geologically  and  historically,  only  de- 
tached fragments  of  a  much  larger  country,  and 
that  neither  their  geology  nor  their  history  can  be 
understood  without  a  continual  reference  to  the 
geology  and  history  of  the  other  European  lands. 
Especially  is  this  the  case  with  their  religious 
history.  Whatever  polemics  there  may  be  about 
the  ties  of  the  earlier  Church  here,  generally  known 
as  the  British  Church,  there  can  be  no  question 
whatever  that  the  Church  of  the  English  was  the 
daughter  of  Rome.  What  the  missionaries  broug^ht 
with  them  and  planted  here  was  what  they  had 
learnt  very  largely  indeed  from  the  lips  of  the  great 
Pope  whose  spiritual  children  they  were,  for  they 
had  been  trained  in  the  monastery  he  had  founded, 
where  he  had  spent  much  of  his  leisure,  and  where 
his  heart  was  generally  to  be  found  when  his  body 
was  elsewhere. 

It  is  a  misfortune  that  we  have  next  to  noth- 
ing recorded  in  regard  to  the  personal  views  of 
the  missionaries  themselves,  on  religious  or  secular 
subjects.  Not  a  scrap  of  their  writings  (if  any  ever 
existed)  has  survived.  The  documents  containing 
the  story  of  their  mission,  scanty  as  they  are,  deal 


PREFACE  ix 

only  with  its  external  aspects.  For  an  account  of 
the  Christianity  they  planted  here,  its  dogmatic 
leanings,  its  ritual,  and  its  general  policy,  we  must 
turn  to  the  voluminous  writings  of  their  devoted 
father  and  master,  Gregory.  Hence  the  necessity 
for  a  careful  survey  of  the  great  Pope's  life  and 
works  as  a  preparation  for  any  satisfactory  study 
of  the  mission.  This,  as  I  have  said,  I  made  in 
the  previous  volume. 

The  present  volume  deals  with  the  history  of 
Gregory's  venture  from  its  inception  to  its  close  on 
the  death  of  Archbishop  Deusdedit,  when  the  Epis- 
copal succession  derived  from  Augustine  came  to  an 
end,  and  had  to  be  revived  under  more  promising 
conditions  by  Archbishop  Theodore.  It  does  not 
profess  to  deal  with  the  British  or  with  the  Scotic 
Church.  With  both  of  them  that  mission  had 
slight  ties  and  both  of  them  have  an  entirely 
different  history,  with  which  I  may  deal  on  another 
occasion. 

It  is  njt  a  very  exhilarating  story  that  I  have  to 
tell,  for,  notwithstanding  a  good  deal  of  romantic 
writing  by  soft-hearted  and  sentimental  apologists,  the 
mission  was  essentially  a  failure.  The  conditions 
were,  in  fact,  difficult  and  unpromising.  The  part  of 
England  then  possessed  by  the  English,  instead  of 
being  governed  by  one  sovereign  or  one  royal  stock, 
as  in  Gaul,  was  broken  up  into  several  rival  principal- 
ities, at  continual  feud  with  each  other.  They  had 
only  one  common  occasional  tie,  in  the  person  of  a 
specially  redoubtable  person  among  the  rival  princes 


X  PREFACE 

who  became  for  a  while  supreme,  and  for  a  while 
held  the  hegemony  of  the  whole  country,  which 
presently  passed  to  another  strong  man.  This  dis- 
integrated condition  of  the  community  presented 
great  obstacles  to  any  concerted  action  on  the  part 
of  the  champions  of  a  new  faith.  It  led  to  jealousies, 
and  it  offered  wild  souls  who  preferred  the  religion 
of  their  fathers  a  ready  means  of  finding  a  champion, 
if  not  at  home,  in  some  neighbouring  state,  to  oppose 
those  who  surrendered  to  the  new  God  and  the  new 
forms  of  magic  (as  they  doubtless  understood  the 
ritual  of  the  foreigners)  of  the  Italian  monks. 

I  hope  I  have  made  it  plain  in  the  previous 
volume  that  Gregory,  although  not  technically  a 
monk,  was  a  very  ideal  monk  in  his  heart  and  aspira- 
tions. Religion  meant  very  largely  with  him  a 
devotion  to  asceticism  and  a  sacrifice  and  surrender 
of  this  life,  in  order  maybe  to  purchase  another 
and  a  happier  existence  beyond  the  clouds.  He 
would  have  liked  the  whole  world  to  be  a  monastery 
and  all  mankind  to  be  clad  in  homespun,  to  abnegate 
all  kinds  of  aesthetic  living,  and  to  devote  them- 
selves to  penitence  and  prayer.  Hence  he  forms 
the  one  heroic  figure  in  the  history  of  monkery. 
He  idealised  the  monkish  life  and  monkish  stand- 
ards, and  he  accepted  as  more  or  less  divinely  in- 
spired the  mystical  thought  and  the  materialised 
dreams  and  imaginings  which  pursue  men  when 
they  press  asceticism  to  the  verge  of  endurance  and 
starve  their  bodies  and  punish  them  with  pain  and 
suffering,  until  their    morbid  thought    has  become 


PREFACE  xi 

more  or  less  ecstatic  and  epileptic.  His  Dialogues 
prove  this  most  completely. 

With  this  ideal  of  life,  he  was  the  first  Churchman 
of  great  parts  who  deliberately  placed  the  monk's 
role  and  career  above  that  of  his  secular  brethren. 
Parish  priests  who  had  to  live  a  much  more  trying  life 
in,  and  continually  to  associate  with,  the  world,  its 
diseases  and  its  crimes,  and  to  apply  such  remedies 
to  them  as  they  could  with  their  frail  weapons,  had, 
he  thought,  a  humbler  sphere.  Gregory  not  only 
placed  the  life  of  a  secular  priest  at  a  lower  ideal 
level  than  that  of  a  monk,  but  he  deemed  it  largely 
inconsistent  with  a  monk's  vocation.  He  was  also  re- 
sponsible for  introducing  the  germs  of  what  became, 
perhaps,  the  most  pernicious  of  all  innovations  on 
the  Christian  polity  of  primitive  times — namely,  the 
exemption  of  monasteries  from  episcopal  supervision 
and  the  loosening  of  their  disciplinary  regimen. 

The  fact  that  the  missionaries  who  came  to 
evangelise  the  English  were  rnonks  and  not 
secular  clergy,  and  the  consequences  that  followed, 
are  so  important  that  I  must  be  forgiven  for  enlarg- 
ing somewhat  on  the  ideals  of  the  early  monks  and 
their  methods  of  attaining  them. 

The  theory  underlying  the  monastic  life  has  some 
difficulty  in  justifying  itself  by  an  appeal  to  the  New 
Testament.  The  institution  was  not  of  Christian 
origin.  It  had  close  ties  with  some  forms  of  Jewish 
asceticism  as  practised  by  the  Essenes  and  other 
Jewish  sects  among  whom  the  secluded  life  had  be- 
come widely  prevalent  at  the  opening  of  the  Christian 


xii  PREFACE 

era,  and  it  was  with  one  of  these  sects  that  Christ's 
precursor,   John   the   Baptist,   probably  passed  the 
greater  part  of  his  career.      But  we  find  nothing  re- 
sembHng  monasticism  in  the  teaching  of  Christ  or 
embodied  in  His  scheme.     The  central  and  original 
idea  of  a  monk's  life  was  not  the  bettering  of  the  world 
and  the  leavening  of  his  fellow-men  with   higher 
aspirations,  by  working  among  them,  and  teaching 
those  who  were  weaker,  more  ignorant,  or  more  un- 
fortunate than  himself  how  to  spend  more  profitable 
and  joyful  lives.     Not  at  all.     The  monk's  chief  pre- 
miss was,  and  still  is,  that  this  life  is  unprofitable 
and  utterly  wicked  and  base ;  that  all  its  joys  are 
delusive  ;  and  that  every  man  has  as  much  as  he 
can  do,  to  make  sure  that  when  he  bids  good-bye 
to  the  world  he  shall  himself  attain  to  perfect  happi- 
ness in  another  home.    The  helping  and  bettering  of 
others  was  to  him  a  very  distant  vision.     What  he 
had  to  do  was  to  save  his  own  soul,  and  asceticism, 
in  theory,  means  the  ransom  of  a  soul  which  is  by 
nature  wicked,  by  means  of  a  lifelong  penance  and 
punishment  and  prayer.     According  to  this  theory, 
a  man  must    cut  himself   off  from    the  world  and 
from  his  fellow-men.      He    should  neither  consort 
with  them  nor  even  exchange  thoughts  with  them 
except  when  literally  necessary,  but  rather  devote 
himself  to  self-contemplation  and  introspection.     In- 
stead of  treating  the  body  as  of  equal  importance  and 
dignity  with  the  soul,  with  which  it  is  united  by  a 
necessarily  indissoluble  tie  as  long  as  life  continues, 
the  link  was  interpreted  by  the  monks  as  an  unholy 


PREFACE  xiii 

alliance  between  a  body  ruled  by  passions  and 
a  soul  capable  of  higher  things.  The  only  way 
to  eventually  release  the  soul  from  its  degrading 
bondage  was  to  continually  mortify  and  punish  the 
body,  to  compel  it  to  resist  all  its  natural  crav- 
ings and  appetites  and  to  deny  it  everything  which 
could  be  deemed  pleasure  or  happiness  or  joy. 
This,  as  we  have  seen,  was  the  express  teaching 
of  St.  Gregory,  the  great  apostle  of  the  monks. 
He  continually  urged  upon  his  disciples  the  duty  of 
perpetual  penance  so  as  to  secure  a  safe  haven  for 
themselves  in  a  future  life.  In  order  to  gain  this 
future,  painted  by  him  as  one  of  ineffable  happiness, 
he  held  that  pain,  misery,  and  self-imposed  torture 
were  the  most  fitting  apprenticeship  and  preparation. 
This  was  the  typical  monk's  theory  of  life  in  the 
earlier  centuries  after  Christianity,  and  it  was  rigidly 
practised  by  the  lonely  hermits  and  anchorites. 

Presently,  certain  of  these  hermits  found  it 
convenient  for  various  reasons,  and  notably  that 
of  protection  against  external  enemies,  to  associate 
themselves  in  communities  living  close  together.  In 
these  they  prayed  on  certain  days  in  the  same  church 
and  sometimes  they  fed  together  in  the  same  room, 
while  their  various  cells  were  enclosed  by  one  pro- 
tecting wall.  They,  however,  kept  up  the  initial  idea 
of  rigid  seclusion  in  other  respects.  Each  had  his 
own  hut,  where  he  lived  and  slept  and  prayed  ;  the 
common  life  being  as  much  restricted  as  possible, 
and  the  solitary  and  silent  one  encouraged.  These 
communities  were  presided  over  by  some  autocratic 


xiv  PREFACE 

old  member  of  the  body  with  a  reputation  for  greater 
sanctity,  which  often  meant  a  capacity  for  sustain- 
ing life  under  especially  trying  conditions.  Such 
communities  were  to  be  found  all  over  the  Christian 
East,  and  are  still  the  models  on  which  the  monas- 
teries of  the  Greek  Church  are  constituted.  A 
Greek  laura  is  a  mere  aggregation  of  hermits. 

This  continual  struggle  against  all  the  instincts 
and  the  natural  desires  of  men  and  women  and  of 
the  tender  promptings  of  their  hearts,  was  no  doubt 
more  easy  to  maintain  among  the  single  anchorites 
living  apart  and  under  the  close  eye  of  pupils  and 
devotees  than  in  the  enclosed  communities,  where 
the  afflatus  and  extreme  tension  had  a  tendency 
to  relax  and  the  discipline  to  become  affected. 
Presently,  wiser  men  began  to  see  that  the  process  of 
continually  inventing  new  forms  of  self-torture  must 
be  restrained  if  a  pretence  of  sanity  was  to  be  kept 
up,  and  that  they  must  devise  some  limitations  to 
fanaticism  and  some  regulation  of  the  life  of  the  com- 
munity which  should  not  entirely-crush  all  the  hum- 
anity out  of  the  men  who  joined  it.  They  proceeded 
to  qualify  the  stringent  extravagance  of  penance, 
and  of  almost  continuous  prayer  and  introspection, 
by  some  other  employment  which  should  be  salutary 
both  for  the  health  of  the  body  and  the  health  of 
the  mind  ;  and  otherwise  to  regulate  and  systematise 
the  life  of  the  brotherhood.  Such  a  body  of  regula- 
tions was  known  as  a  Rule,  and  there  were  several 
such  put  together  by  the  founders  of  various  in- 
dividual monasteries,  or  of  groups  of  monasteries. 


PREFACE  XV 

Among  these  a  very  famous  one,  as  we  have  seen  in 
an  earlier  volume,  was  the  Rule  of  St.  Benedict. 
Benedict  introduced  a  great  deal  of  sane  human 
wisdom  and  good  sense  into  his  monasteries,  and 
especially  encouraged,  among  other  things,  the 
element  of  well-regulated  labour  of  the  body,  to  act 
as  a  tonic  to  the  continual  mental  strain  which  had  a 
tendency  to  produce  hysteria  and  paralysis  of  the 
mind.  Under  Benedict's  Rule  again,  there  grew  up 
a  corporate  devotion  and  loyalty  among  the  brethren, 
first  of  a  monk  to  his  own  monastery,  and  then  of 
each  member  of  a  house  to  those  of  any  other  house 
in  the  same  Order.  This  family  feeling  among  the 
monks  was  fostered  by  the  largely  democratic 
character  of  the  Benedictine  constitution.  Thus 
a  remedy  was  found  for  the  strongly  individualised 
and  self-centred  life  practised  by  the  anchorites. 

The  new  departure  had  excellent  results  in 
other  ways.  As  the  monasteries  increased  in  size 
and  wealth  by  the  gifts  of  the  pious,  their  posses- 
sions needed  more  and  more  skill  in  manage- 
ment. The  establishments  became  more  and  more, 
not  merely  communities  for  practising  continual 
asceticism  and  prayer,  but  great  farms  and  manu- 
factories where  everything  necessary  for  the  life  and 
health  of  the  community  was  studied  and  practised. 
Not  only  was  farming  pursued  with  skill  and  know- 
ledge, but  road-making,  and  draining,  and  convey- 
ing pure  water  for  drinking,  and  making  ponds  for 
stocking  fish,  and  plantations  for  providing  timber 
and  firewood,  were  all  practised  in  most  scientific 


xvi  PREFACE 

fashion.  All  this  involved  a  condition  of  things  as 
far  removed  as  can  be  conceived  from  the  ideals  of 
St,  Pachomius  and  St,  Macarius,  It  led,  no  doubt, 
to  what  the  historians  of  the  monks  have  every  right 
to  claim  as  largely  their  work — namely,  the  reclaim- 
ing of  large  parts  of  the  land  in  Western  and  Central 
Europe  from  waste  and  desert,  and  the  spreading, 
by  means  of  the  intercommunion  between  the  larger 
houses,  of  a  knowledge  of  all  the  arts  of  rural  life, 
which  was  supplemented  by  schemes  for  educating 
the  young  and  ignorant,  and  the  practice  of  skilled 
calligraphy  for  the  multiplication  of  books.  This 
state  of  things,  however,  took  a  long  time  to  grow. 

The  monks  who  were  sent  to  convert  the  rough, 
heathen  Eno-Iish  were  not  men  of  business  and  men 
of  the  world  of  the  type  of  their  later  descendants 
at  Malmesbury  or  Peterborough  or  Gloucester, 
who  were  accustomed  to  deal  with  men  and  to  face 
difficulties  in  doing  so,  but  were  very  simple  folk, 
who  had  virtually  lived  like  hermits  and  thought 
like  hermits.  Those  who  have  pictured  for  us  the 
mission  of  Augustine  and  his  brethren  have  too 
often  had  in  their  minds  not  St.  Gregory's  pupils, 
but  monks  like  those  of  St.  Albans  in  the  days  of 
its  glory,  or  of  Downside  in  our  own  day. 

Even  in  later  times  the  useful  work  done  by 
the  monks  in  civilising  the  Western  World  must 
not  allow  us  to  forget  that  there  was  another  side  to 
the  question. 

In  theory,  the  life  of  the  monastery  was  regulated 
by  the  Rule  say  of  St.  Benedict,  and  in  many  matters  it 


PREFACE  xvii 

was  so  in  practice  also.  The  growth  of  wealth  and 
the  manifold  employments  and  responsibilities  of 
great  monasteries  must,  however,  have  interfered 
greatly  with  discipline  and  with  the  ideal  monk's  life. 
Especially  did  it  do  so  as  the  life  in  the  richer 
monasteries  became  more  luxurious,  more  attractive, 
and  indeed  far  more  comfortable,  than  that  in  the 
feudal  castles  or  the  lonely  manor-houses  of  the  laity. 
This  led  to  men  repairing  thither  to  pass  easy  lives 
rather  than  with  rigid  ideas  of  asceticism.  Princes 
and  great  nobles,  princesses  and  great  ladies,  flocked 
to  the  cloisters,  and  adopted  the  outward  garb  of 
monks  and  nuns,  but  not  their  spirit,  and  gave  an- 
other turn  to  the  life  within  and  without.  This  was 
encouraged  by  the  appointment  of  the  abbots  in  the 
larger  abbeys  being  in  many  cases  really,  though  not 
always  formally,  controlled  by  the  King.  They  had 
become  too  rich  and  powerful  to  be  the  mere  nominees 
of  the  monks,  and  the  kings  and  great  nobles  began  to 
look  on  the  abbeys  as  prizes  to  be  given  to  their  rela- 
tions and  supporters.  These  recruits  often  came  in 
not  as  monks,  but  as  useful  politicians.  According  to 
St.  Benedict's  Rule,  each  monastery  was  an  entirely 
separate  institution  from  every  other,  and  entirely 
self-governed.  This  made  it  more  difficult  to  main- 
tain high  standards  and  good  discipline  everywhere, 
and  laxity  of  discipline  due  to  the  want  of  supervision 
was  the  eventual  cause  of  monastic  decay.  Hence 
the  necessity  that  was  found  by  the  great  reformers 
of  the  Benedictines  in  later  times,  such  as  the 
founders  of  the  Cistercian  and  Cluniac  Orders,  tq 


xviii  PREFACE 

affiliate  all  their  houses  to  the  mother-house,  and 
thus  to  have  a  system  of  careful  control  and  an 
annual  conference  of  all  the  abbots  of  the  Order, 
so  as  to  maintain  uniformity  of  practice  and  of  life, 
instead  of  each  monastery  having  individual 
theories  of  laxity  or  strictness  largely  dependent 
on  the  character  of  the  abbot  for  the  time  being. 

The  best  remedy  in  such  a  case  was  the  independ- 
ent one  of  episcopal  visitation.  To  this  the  monks 
have  always  had  great  objections.  The  ecclesiastical 
life  of  the  Middle  Ages  is  full  of  instances  of 
struggles  by  abbeys  to  escape  from  episcopal 
control  and  visitation,  and  of  the  employment  of 
forgery  and  chicanery  galore,  in  order  to  secure 
their  ends.  In  this  struggle  the  continual  tendency 
of  the  Holy  See  was  to  support  the  monks,  who 
became  in  most  countries  the  janissaries  of  the  Pope. 
For  him  they  fought  very  largely  with  the  same 
weapons  and  by  the  same  sinister  acts  by  which 
they  fought  for  their  own  hands.  Saint  Gregory, 
great  Pope  as  he  was,  did  infinite  harm  in  this, 
as  in  so  many  instances,  by  misinterpreting  the 
signs  of  the  future.  A  monk  in  heart,  as  we  have 
seen,  he  was  always  ready  to  foster  monkish  in- 
dependence of  control. 

From  his  day  we  may  definitely  date  the  begin- 
ning of  the  invasion  of  the  primitive  right  of 
bishops  and  synods  to  direct  the  affairs  of  the 
Church  in  all  ways,  and  the  gradual  substitution  of 
an  imperium  m  miperio  in  every  diocese  where  a 
monastery  existed.    Not  only  did  this  tend  to  destroy 


PREFACE  xix 

the  original  ideal  of  church  polity  and  of  Christian 
life  as  presented  in  the  Bible,  but  to  substitute 
another  ideal  for  it — that  which  has  borne  its  richest 
fruits  not  among-  Christians  but  amono-  the  Northern 
Buddhists  of  Tibet  and  the  Southern  ones  of 
Ceylon  and  Burma.  The  monks  presently  became 
very  largely  the  authors  of  a  continually  changing 
kaleidoscope  of  new  cults,  of  new  ritual,  of  new 
moral  theories.  They  further  exalted  the  condition 
of  celibacy  into  a  special  virtue,  and  were  largely 
responsible  for  the  substitution  of  devotions  to  the 
Virgin  (whom  they  idealised  in  a  morbid  way,  per- 
haps natural  to  secluded  celibates)  for  the  primitive 
worship  of  the  Deity.  The  monastic  theory  of  sur- 
rendering the  will  and  thought  of  the  monk  to  his 
abbot  was  extended  presently  to  lay  folk  and  their 
priests.  By  dangerously  enlarging  the  theory  of 
confession,  it  eventually  became  the  most  potent 
instrument  for  sapping  the  virility  of  the  human 
conscience.  Presently  again,  when  the  Orders 
had  greatly  increased,  and  had  to  compete  with 
each  other  for  the  good  things  of  life,  and  for  the 
good  will,  the  help  and  patronage  of  the  poor  and 
ignorant  laity,  whose  faith  in  southern  climates  is 
so  much  coloured  by  its  dramatic  trappings,  they 
also  began  to  compete  in  providing  more  and 
more  highly  seasoned  food  to  attract  the  never- 
satisfied  appetite  of  the  credulous  and  the  ignorant. 
They  accordingly  became  the  great  purveyors  of 
miracles,  of  the  cult  of  relics,  of  the  multiplication  of 
saints,  pilgrimages,  of  images  with  special  virtues. 


XX  PREFACE 

and  of  revived  pagan  forms  of  magic.  In  their  efforts 
to  do  this  they  defied  all  the  attempts  of  bishops 
and  clergy  to  restrain  them,  until  they  had  over- 
laid the  Christianity  of  primitive  times  by  a  revived 
paganism  which  may  be  best  studied  in  the  villages 
of  Southern  Italy,  of  Sicily,  of  Spain,  and  of 
Latin  America.  Above  all  things,  they  became 
the  special  bodyguard  of  the  Pope,  always  ready 
to  fight  for  the  enhancement  of  his  authority 
and  for  the  corresponding  degradation  of  the 
episcopate,  of  which  the  Pope  was  theoretically 
only  the  senior  member.  Thus  the  administrative 
machinery  of  Christianity  itself  became  entirely 
changed.  This  aspect  of  monachism  has  been  very 
much  minimised  by  professed  Church  historians, 
whose  role  it  is  to  hide  these  unattractive  and  for- 
bidding aspects  of  the  past  in  a  misleading  and  quite 
spurious  glory,  instead  of  letting  men  profit  by  the  mis- 
takesof their best-meaningancestors.  No  onedoubts 
that  in  their  inception  the  changes  were  well  meant, 
but  they  involved  a  false  analysis  of  human  nature 
and  its  frailties,  which  are  always  tending  to  mis- 
take exaggerated  emotional  tendencies  for  religion. 
In  view  of  all  this,  it  must  be  kept  perpetually 
in  view  that  Gregory's  mission  to  England  was 
entirely  manned  by  monks.  It  seems  perfectly 
plain  that,  with  the  exception  of  certain  individuals 
(very  few  are  recorded)  who  were  necessary  to  serve 
the  altar,  none  of  them  were  priests,  nor  in  fact  in 
holy  orders,  but  were  simply  laymen  who  had  taken 
perpetual  vows  of  poverty,  humility,  and  obedience, 


PREFACE  xxi 

and  lived  by  a  Rule.  They  consorted  together  in 
communities  in  the  large  towns.  There  were  no 
parishes,  no  parish  priests  ;  but  the  monks  used  to 
travel  from  place  to  place  at  stated  times  and  hold 
baptisms  and  preachings,  while  occasionally  they 
would  take  a  priest  with  them  who  administered 
the  Holy  Sacrament.  The  only  parishes  were  the 
dioceses,  which  were  called  parochia.  All  this  is 
difficult  for  us  to  realise,  and  more  difficult  because 
of  the  scantiness  of  our  materials  ;  but  it  emphasises 
the  fact  that  the  mission  of  St.  Augustine  was  a 
monks'  mission,  and  worked  from  a  monastery.  It 
was  like  the  early  Spanish  missions  in  South  America 
and  the  Philippines,  and  very  unlike  such  missions 
as  those  sent  out  by  the  Church  Missionary  Society 
in  charge  of  one  or  more  secular  priests,  and  having 
the  parochial  system  in  view.  The  missioners  whom 
Gregory  sent  were  themselves  hardly  sympathetic 
harbingers  of  good  tidings.     They  had  an  unfamiliar 

(quiteforeign)physicalappearance,olivecomplexions, 
black  hair,  and  strange  garb.  They  spoke  a  foreign 
tongue,  and  if  some  succeeded  in  learning  the  native 
speech,  it  must  have  been  imperfectly  and  no  doubt 
they  spoke  it  with  a  strong  accent.  If  there  were 
interpreters,  they  were  very  indifferent  conduit  pipes 
between  the  debased  Latin  speech  of  most  of  the 
preachersand  the  understandings  of  the  rudewarriors. 
Under  these  circumstances,  they  were  probably 
tempted  to  gain  the  favour  of  their  semi-heathen  and 
only  half-converted  flocks  by  making  compromises 
with   old   beliefs,  old  legends,  and    old    divinities. 


xxii  PREFACE 

They  reconsecrated  to  Christian  uses  ancient  holy 
wells  and  sacred  trees,  while  the  whole  machinery 
of  a  more  ancient  magic  was  ever  readily  adapted 
to  the  new  faith  by  having  new  nam.es  given  to 
it  or  being  dressed  in  fresh  clothes.  The  prime 
difficulty  of  all,  however,  was  doubtless  the  tempera- 
ment of  their  chief  Augustine,  an  unsympathetic 
person,  with  little  tact,  and  pursued  by  the  small 
thoughts  and  small  issues  that  act  as  gadflies  on  men 
who  live  secluded  lives,  as  witness  his  well-known 
questions  sent  to  Gregory  on  difficult  matters,  some 
very  trivial  and  some  very  unclean,  and  described 
later  on.  It  thus  came  about  that  while  the  Roman 
missionaries  made  little  headway,  those  who  went 
out  from  lona  and  Lindisfarne  and  represented 
another  allegiance  proceeded  to  the  conversion  of 
the  greater  part  of  England  to  the  Faith. 

It  is  not  easy  to  say  how  much  of  the  ritual 
and  practice  which  was  followed  by  the  missionaries 
was  other  than  that  preached  at  Rome  and  was  de- 
rived from  that  of  Gaul.  Some  of  it  we  know  was  so 
derived,  and  it  may  well  have  been  thought  suitable 
to  their  new  conditions  by  the  missionaries  who  had 
stayed  a  considerable  time  there  on  their  way.  Nor 
must  we  forget  that  a  Gallic  mission  had  already  sown 
some  scattered  seeds  in  Britain.  It  accompanied 
the  French  Queen  on  her  way  hither,  and  the  new 
missioners  would  probably  like  to  make  their  prac- 
tices conform  as  closely  as  they  could  to  those  which 
were  already  familiar  to  some  of  the  community. 

I  have  tried  to  make  the  story  as  complete  as 


PREFACE  xxiii 

possible   by    incorporating   a    record  of   every  fact 
accessible  to  me,  and  I  hope  I  may  have  illuminated 
some  dark  points  and  corrected  some  errors.     Inter 
alia,   I  have    thought   it    right    to  give  a  detailed 
account  of  the  decayed  and  poor  fragments  of  the 
sacred  buildings  positively  known  to  have  been  put 
up  by  the  missioners.      They  are   the   only  docu- 
ments   remaining    on    British    soil    which    we    can 
certainly  identify  with  Augustine  and  his  immediate 
successors,  and  if  they  have  no  artistic  merit  they 
are  at  least   genuine.      They   no  doubt    represent 
very  much  the  kind  of  buildings  then  being  put  up 
in  Gaul  :  shadows  of  shadows  of  Roman  structures 
built  for  the  most  part  with  Roman  bricks  or  Roman 
dressed  ashlar,  and  in  the  Roman  fashion  of  walling, 
and  they  mark  the  depth  to  which  the  architectural  art 
had  then  sunk.     As  a  background  to  the  picture,  I 
have  continually  had  in  view  what  was  passing  else- 
where than  in  these  islands,  and  have  given  a  con- 
densed notice  of  the  history  of  the  Empire,  of  Spain, 
and  of  Francia  (as  Gaul  then  began  to  be  called),  in 
all  of  which  lands  the  dramatic  history  of  the  Church 
was  at  that  time  passing  th  rough  great  and  far-reaching 
changes  material  and  moral.     These,  however  ap- 
parently far  off,  had  effects  on  the  outermost  skirts  of 
Christendom.     Among  them  the  most  important  was 
the  final  conquest  of  Spain  by  the  Visigoths,  who  had 
now  become  orthodox,  and  the  overwhelming  of  three 
of  the  four  Eastern  patriarchates  by  the  Muhamme- 
dans,  who  also  gave  the  Empire  very  heavy  blows  in 
the  latter   years  of    Heraclius   and  his  successors. 


xxiv  PREFACE 

The  history  of  the  Papacy  itself  at  this  time  is  for 
the  most  part  uninteresting,  and  only  known  in  a 
fragmentary  fashion.  The  most  dramatic  events, 
apart  from  the  life  of  Honorius,  are  those  relating 
to  the  Popedom  of  Martin  i.,  which  has  been 
absurdly  misinterpreted  by  most  Church  historians. 
Their  views  I  have  partially  corrected  by  an 
appeal  to  a  learned  Benedictine  who  belongs  to 
an  Order  famous  not  only  for  its  learning  but  for 
its  ingenuous  treatment  of  history.  Meanwhile, 
the  Western  World  was  sinking  into  greater 
intellectual  lethargy  and  decay,  and  especially 
in  Italy  and  Gaul.  The  Church  in  Spain,  so 
recently  converted  to  orthodoxy,  had  become  a 
centre  and  source  of  movement  in  which  several 
fine  scholars  took  a  part.  This  vigour  was  marred 
by  the  characteristic  Spanish  temper  of  impatience 
at  the  existence  of  intellectual  liberty,  and  the 
persecution  of  Jews  and  heretics.  The  one  un- 
sullied centre  and  focus  of  religious  life,  of  mission- 
ary enterprise,  and  of  devotion  to  learning,  was 
Ireland,  the  last  green  spot  which  the  sun  in  his 
daily  journey  across  the  Atlantic  suffuses  with  gold 
and  purple  from  his  exhaustless  palette.  Alas,  that 
this  phase  in  the  history  of  a  gifted  and  unhappy 
race,  whom  fortune  has  generally  treated  as  a  step- 
daughter, should  so  soon  have  passed  away  !  We 
must  never  forget,  however,  that  during  the  period 
we  are  dealing  with,  Columbanus  in  Gaul  and 
Switzerland  and  Columba  at  lona  were  holding 
up  for   man's  guidance,   across   the    fearful   waves 


PREFACE  XXV 

that  then  tormented  the  Christian  world,  great 
lamps  whose  glow  filled  all  Europe  from  lona  to 
Bobbio  and  St.  Gallen. 

The  three  appendices  which  close  the  volume 
deal    with    matters     which,    although      somewhat 
remote    from     the    affairs    of    England,    are    im- 
portant enough    in    the  annals  of    Europe  and    of 
the  Church  at  the  time  we  are  dealing  with,  and 
which  needed  discussion  in  view  of  the  latest  lights 
and   information    about  them.      I    would  especially 
commend  the  Second  Appendix  to  my  readers.     In 
it  I  have  tried  to  analyse  with  some  pains  the  difficult 
question  of  the  position  of  Pope  Honorius  in  regard 
to  the  issue  of  Papal  Infallibility.     The  historical 
methods  of  Baronius,  Bellarmine,  and  Turrecremata 
are  no  longer  in  fashion,  and  few  of  their  polemical 
writings  have  any  value  for  us.      Upon  no  subject 
did  they  confuse  the  judgment  of  honest  folk    so 
much  as  upon  this  one,  and  upon  no   other  have 
they  so  much  embarrassed  the  apologists  of  their 
Order   and  of  their    Faith.     I    have    tried    to  do 
justice  to  a  great  Pope  and  an  honest  man,  and  to 
show  how  his  assailants  have  led  their  Church  to 
Coventry  in  their  attempts  to  distort  and  falsify  the 
clearest  light  of  history.     They  have    done  so  in 
support  of  a  paradox  whose  conditions  they  cannot 
or  dare  not  define — namely,  that  of  Papal  Infalli- 
bility.    Perhaps  those  who  are  not  interested  in  that 
issue  may  be  interested  in  the  wider  one   I  have 
raised    in  regard  to  the  authority  of  the  so-called 
Fathers  and  Doctors  of  the  Church  to  settle  dogmas. 


xxvi  PREFACE 

1  am  not  sure  that  the  real  gravity  of  this  issue  has 
been  hitherto  sufficiently  appreciated. 

The  Third  Appendix  deals  with  the  status  and 
position  of  the  Papal  Nuncios  at  Constantinople, 
and  with  the  mode  of  selection  of  the  Popes  in  the 
sixth  and  seventh  centuries.  The  Nuncios  were 
much  more  important  persons  than  is  sometimes 
suspected,  and,  as  a  recent  Catholic  writer  says  : 
"  To  be  sent  as  apocrisiariits  to  Constantinople 
was  to  graduate   for  the  Papacy." 

The  first  Appendix  contains  a  detailed  account 
of  the  terrible  ravages  of  the  plague  in  the  sixth 
and  seventh  centuries,  and  o-ives  a  list  of  its  known 
victims,  which  proves  how  terribly  the  Church 
must  have  suffered  from  the  attack  ;  for  we  probably 
only  have  a  tithe  of  the  names  of  those  who  were  in 
Orders  and  died,  names  which  are  doubtless  limited 
to  the  most  prominent  Churchmen. 

Meanwhile,  may  I  crave  a  kind  thought  from  my 
readers  if  I  have  enabled  them  even  in  a  small  way 
to  see  a  little  farther  into  the  shadows  that  shroud 
so  much  of  the  history  of  our  country  in  the  seventh 
century.  May  I  ask  that  they  will  be  patient  when 
they  come  across  occasional  errors  of  fact  or  temper 
or  taste,  and  not  expect  me  to  be  as  immaculate  as 
themselves,  nor  disdain  altogfether  what  has  been 
the  result  of  much  labour  and  thought,  because  of 
the  wretched  flies  that  may  have  crept  into  my  pot  of 
ointment  while  I  have  been  nodding. 

30  CoLLiNGHAM  Place.  H.  H.  HOWORTH. 

December  i,  1912. 


CONTENTS 


FAGB 

Preface        .  .  .  .  .  •  .     vii 

Introduction  ......  xxxi 

The    Emperors,    Popes,    and   the    Kings   of   the 
Franks  and  Visigoths,  from  595  to  664    .  Ixxxiii 

Genealogy  of  the  Descendants  of  Chlothaire  II.  Ixxxiv 

The  English  Archbishops  and  Bishops,  and  the 
Abbots  of  St.  Augustine's,  from  597  to  664         .  Ixxxv 

The   Episcopal   Succession    from    Augustine    to 
Damian     ...... 

Genealogy  of  the  Kings  of  Kent  and  Essex 

Genealogy  of  the  Kings  of  East  Anglia    . 

Genealogy  of  the  Kings  of  Deira    . 

Genealogy  of  the  Kings  of  Bernicia 


Addenda 


Ixxxvi 
Ixxxvii 
Ixxxvii 
Ixxxviii 
Ixxxviii 

Ixxxix 


CHAP. 

I. 

II. 

III. 

IV. 

V. 

VI. 


Appendix   I. :  The  Bubonic  Plague   in  the  Sixth 
AND  Seventh  Centuries         .  .  .  • 

Appendix    II.:    Pope    Honorius    and    the    Mono- 
thelites    ....••• 

Appendix   III.:  The  Popes  and  their  Nuncios  at 
Constantinople  ...••• 


I 

38 

87 

198 

240 

318 

343 
366 
406 


LIST   OF    ILLUSTRATIONS 


Miniatures  from  the  C.C.C.  M.S.,  Cambridge,  No.  286, 

THE  SO-CALLED  St.  Augustine's  GOSPELS       .  Frontispiece 

FACING   PAGE 

England  a.d.  597  to  652  .  .  ,  .  .1 

The  Marble  Throne  of  St.  Gregory        .  .  .18 

The  Three  Chapels  of  St.  Andrew,  Santa  Silvia,  and 
Santa  Barbara,  originally  built  by  Saint 
Gregory,  and  rebuilt  in  the  Seventeenth 
Century.  (I  owe  this  drawing  to  my  friend,  Mrs.  E. 
McClure)      .......      24 

The  Church  of  Saint  Martin  at  Canterbury,  as  it 

is  now        ..'....      44 

Remains  of  Saxon  Work  at  St.  Martin's,  Canterbury   46 

Remains  of  the  Saxon  Church  of  St.  Pancras  at 

Canterbury    .     .     .     .     .     .72 

The  so-called  St.  Augustine's  Chair  at  the  Cathedral, 

Canterbury    .     .     .     .     .     .96 

Ground  Plans  of  the  Saxon  Churches  of  St.  Martin's 
AND  OF  St.  Pancras's,  Canterbury  ;  of  the  Saxon 
Cathedral  at  Rochester,  and  the  Saxon  Church 

AT   LyMINGE  ......      172 

The  Old  Altar  of  St.  Augustine's  at  Canterbury, 
with  the  Shrines  of  ^Ethelberht,  King  of  Kent, 
and  of  the  early  Archbishops  grouped  around 
it.  (From  an  engraving  in  the  first  edition  of  Dugdale's 
Monasticon)  .  .  .  .  .  .  .186 


XXX  LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS 

PACING    PAGE 

Ground  Plan  of  the  Church  of  Paulinus  at  York  .    262 

The  Two  Sides  of  the  Cross  in  the  Churchyard  at 
Whalley.  (Attributed  by  Bishop  Browne  and  others 
to  Paulinus) .......     266 

The  Inscribed  Cross  at  Hawkswell,  near  Catterick. 
(Attributed  by  Hubner,  Bishop  Browne,  and  others,  to 
James,  the  Deacon  of  PauHnus)      ....     328 

The  Reliquary  of  St.  Eanswitha  at  Folkestone.    (I 

owe  this  photograph  to  my  friend  Sir  Martin  Conway)    .     334 


INTRODUCTION 

The  authorities  for  the  contents  of  this  volume  are 
largely  the  same  as  those  for  the  previous  one  on 
St.  Gregory  which  were  described  in  its  introduc- 
tion. They  begin  with  the  letters  of  that  Pope, 
which  were  of  course  strictly  contemporary  and  con- 
stitute testimony  of  the  best  quality.  The  Pope's 
correspondence  was  entered  up,  as  we  saw,  in  a 
register  comprising  thirteen  and  a  half  volumes, 
each  volume  devoted  to  a  single  year,  the  last  year 
being  incomplete.^  The  first  to  use  these  letters 
was  a  learned  priest  named  Nothelm,  who  became 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  who  made  copies  of 
a  certain  number  of  them  relating  to  St.  Augustine's 
mission  which  he  sent  to  Bede  to  be  used  in  his 
Church  History  of  England.  As  I  remarked  in  the 
previous  introduction,  it  is  curious  that  there  should 
have  been  any  necessity  for  these  copies,  for  the 
originals  ought  to  have  then  been  at  Canterbury. 

It  is  plain,  from  a  subsequent  letter  of  Bishop 
Boniface  to  Archbishop  Ecgberht  of  Canterbury, 
that  only  a  partial  selection  of  the  letters  in  the  papal 
register  (whether  relating  to  Britain  or  not  is  not 
stated)  were  abstracted  by  Nothelm,  for  Boniface 

^  See  H.  H.  Howorth,  Life  of  Gregory  the  Great,  xvii-xix. 


xxxii  INTRODUCTION 

was  able  to  send  some  others  to  his  correspond- 
ent. As  I  also  pointed  out  in  the  previous  intro- 
duction, the  original  registers  have  long  ago  been 
destroyed.  Fortunately,  although  a  considerable 
number  of  the  Pope's  letters  have  been  lost,  a 
very  large  proportion  of  them  remain  in  several 
collections,  about  which  I  have  given  ample  in- 
formation in  my  previous  introduction.  In  the 
present  volume,  as  in  the  previous  one,  I  have 
relied  upon  the  edition  of  Gregory's  letters  edited 
by  Ewald  and  Hartmann,  which,  although  by 
no  means  perfect,  is  very  much  better  than  any 
other.  I  have  quoted  this  edition  by  the  initials 
of  the  editors,  referring  to  each  letter  by  the 
number  of  the  original  volume  of  the  register  in 
which  it  occurs,  with  the  number  of  the  letter  as 
given  by  E.  and  H.  I  have  also  had  continually 
by  my  side  the  excellent  translation  of  a  large 
number  of  the  more  interesting  letters  by  Dr. 
Barmby  in  the  Library  of  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
where  the  letters  are  illuminated  by  excellent 
annotations. 

The  first  of  Gregory's  letters  in  which  the 
English  are  referred  to  is  not  contained  in  Bede. 
It  was  written  in  September  595  by  the  Pope  to 
Candidus,  his  agent  in  Gaul,  and  instructs  him  to 
spend  a  portion  of  the  papal  funds  in  his  hands 
in  the  redemption  of  Anglian  slaves.^ 

The  next  letter  is  dated  23rd  July  596.  It 
is  not  preserved  in  any  of   the  existing  registers, 

^  See  E.  and  H.  vi.  lo  ;  Barmby,  vi.  7  ;  infray  p.  7. 


INTRODUCTION  xxxiii 

and  was  perhaps  never  entered  in  them.  It  is, 
however,  given  by  Bede,  and  may  have  been 
derived  by  him  from  the  records  at  Canterbury. 
John  the  Deacon,  who  quotes  it,  apparently  derived 
it  from  Bede.  This  letter  was  addressed  to  St. 
Augustine's  companions  (whose  hearts  had  failed 
them)  in  order  to  encourage  them.^  It  was  taken 
with  him  by  Augustine  on  his  return  from  Rome 
after  his  visit  there,"  to  cheer  the  faint-heartedness 
of  his  colleaQues. 

Dated  on  the  same  day  are  a  number  of  com- 
mendatory letters  to  the  rulers  and  bishops  of 
Gaul,  recommending  Augustine  and  his  com- 
panions.^ They  are  abstracted,  and  their  contents 
are  discussed  in  the  following  narrative  (pp.  28- 
35).  They  are  all  contained  in  the  extant  copies 
of  the  papal  registers. 

In  September  597  Gregory  wrote  a  letter  to 
Queen  Brunichildis,  in  which,  inte7'  alia,  he  thanked 
her  for  her  kindness  to  Augustine  and  his  com- 
panions.'^ In  July  598  he  wrote  to  Eulogius, 
Patriarch  of  Alexandria,  reporting  to  him  the 
success  of  Augustine's  mission.^  This  and  the 
previous  letter  are  both  contained  in  the  extant 
papal  registers. 

In  July  599  Gregory  wrote  again  to  Brunichildis 
and  told  her  that  he  was  sending  a  pallium  to 
Syagrius,  the  Bishop  of  Autun,  to  reward  him  for 
the  zeal  he  had  shown  in  assisting  Augustine  and 

^  Vide  infra^  30.  ^  It  is  given  by  E.  and  H.  vi.  50a. 

3  See  E.  and H.  vi.  49,  50,  51,  52,  53,  54,  55,  56,  and  57. 

*  E.  and  H.  viii.  4.  ^  E.  and  H.  viii.  29. 


xxxiv  INTRODUCTION 

his  companions/  Of  the  same  date  is  a  letter 
written  directly  to  Syagrius,  in  which  he  makes 
the  same  acknowledgment."  None  of  these  letters 
are  in  Bede. 

In  the  year  597-98,  Augustine,  having  been 
consecrated  Bishop,  sent  a  mission  to  Rome  to  re- 
port about  the  progress  of  his  venture  to  Gregory. 
Its  head,  the  presbyter  Laurence,  also  took  with 
him  a  letter  from  Augustine  to  the  Pope  containing 
a  series  of  questions  on  points  of  practice  and 
ritual  in  which  he  had  found  some  difficulty.  This 
mission  on  its  return  to  England  brought  back  a  num- 
ber of  other  letters  dated  ist  June  601.  Three  were 
addressed  to  Queen  Brunichildis  and  her  two  sons, 
thankine  them  for  their  treatment  of  Augrustine  and 
his  companions,  and  asking  for  similar  favours  for 
Laurence  and  his  party  ;^  another  to  Chlothaire  11., 
Kinof  of  Neustria,  also  commendincj  Laurence  and 
his  party.* '  Others,  again,  were  sent  to  the  bishops 
of  Gaul,  to  whom  Gregory  introduced  the  presbyter 
Laurence  and  his  companions.^  These  are  not  in 
Bede.  The  Pope  further  wrote  letters  to  ^thel- 
berht,  King  of  Kent,  and  his  wife  Bertha,^  and  to 
St.  Augustine  himself.'  These  three  last  letters  are 
contained  in  Bede.  Several  of  the  whole  series  are 
dated  on  the  2nd  January,  while  Nos.  34,  35,  36, 
40,  41,  42,  44,  50,  51  are  dated  simply  in  June. 
The  arrangement   of  these   letters  by  Ewald  and 

1  E.  and  H.  ix.  213.  ^  lb.  ix.  222. 

'  lb.  xi.  47,  48,  49,  and  50.  *  7(5.  51. 

*  lb.  xi.  34,  38,  40,  41,  42,  45-  ®  ib-  ^'"  35  ^nd  37. 
^  lb.  xi.  36,  39. 


INTRODUCTION  xxxv 

Hartmann  is  not  very  logical,  a  fault  which  is  found 
elsewhere  in  their  excellent  work. 

Laurence  and  his  companions  (almost  certainly) 
took  back  with  them  to  Enoland  another 
document  —  namely,  Gregory's  answers  to  St. 
Augustine's  letters.  These  answers  have  given 
rise  to  a  fierce  polemic,  and  their  authenticity 
has  been  questioned  or  denied  by  those  who 
have  had  special  reasons  for  disliking  their 
contents  as  more  or  less  sophisticating  Pope 
Gregory's  orthodoxy.  I  have  discussed  the  ques- 
tion at  length  farther  on,^  and  have  shown  what  a 
great  weight  of  authority  there  is  in  their  favour, 
including  some  recent  Roman  Catholic  writers  with 
critical  acumen,  and  I  have  no  doubt  myself  that 
the  answers  in  question  were  the  handiwork  of  the 
great  Pope.  These  responsions  or  answers  are 
not  contained  in  the  papal  registers,  but  are  pre- 
served by  Bede.  Ewald  and  Hartmann  took  their 
text  of  them^  from  Bede.  One  great  difficulty 
which  those  people  have  to  face  who  question  the 
authenticity  of  the  responsions  is  that,  if  forged, 
they  must  have  been  forged  before  the  time  of 
Bishop  Boniface,  who  refers  to  them  in  a  letter 
written  before  741. 

After  Laurence  and  Mellitus  with  their  com- 
panions had  left  Rome  they  were  followed  by  a 
messenger  from  the  Pope  carrying  another  letter  in 
which  he  corrected  an  instruction  of  his  own  in  regard 
to  the  treatment  of  the  heathen  temples  by  the  mis- 

*  Infra,  pp.  loo-l  14.  *  xi.  56a. 


xxxvi  INTRODUCTION 

sionaries.  This  letter  was  addressed  not  to  Lau- 
rence but  to  his  companion,  Mellitus.  It  is 
preserved  in  the  codices  labelled  R  by  Ewald,  and 
also  by  Bede/  and  is  discussed  below  (p.  128,  etc.). 
It  is  dated  i8th  July  601. 

This  is  the  last  letter  in  Gregory's  corre- 
spondence in  which  he  refers  to  Britain. 

Contemporary  with  Gregory  the  Pope  was 
Gregory  the  Bishop  of  Tours,  whose  work  on 
the  Franks  is  a  priceless  record  for  the  history  of 
the  Merovingian  period  in  France.  It  is  notable 
that  he  should  have  so  little  to  say  about  England, 
showing  what  a  remote  and  unimportant  area  it 
was  in  his  time.  He  does  not  refer  at  all  to 
Augustine's  mission  ;  while  in  his  account  of  the 
marriage  of  the  Princess  Bertha,  daughter  of  King 
Charibert,  he  does  not  give  us  the  name  of  her 
husband,  yEthelberht,  nor  of  any  other  English 
ruler.  The  little  he  has  to  tell  us  about  the 
people  beyond  the  Channel  is  incorporated  in 
the  following  pages. 

The  only  other  documents  of  a  contemporary 
date  professing  to  have  to  do  with  the  English 
Church  are  certain  charters  granting  lands  and 
claiming  to  have  been  given  by  the  kings  of 
Kent  to  the  new  Church,  and  also  certain  laws 
attributed  to  yEthelberht,  King  of  Kent.  I  say  "pro- 
fessing" advisedly,  for,  with  the  exception  of  the 
laws,  I  have  no  doubt  that  all  these  documents  are 
sophistications.  The  charters  granting  lands  were 
1  H.E.  i.  30. 


INTRODUCTION  xxxvii 

published  by  Kemble  in  his  well-known  work 
entitled  Codex  Diplomaticus,  and  were  reprinted  in 
another  and  enlarged  form  by  my  old  friend  Mr. 
de  Gray  Birch.  It  is  a  great  pity  this  latter  work 
has  not  been  completed.  It  also  much  needs  a  com- 
mentary and  annotations,  and  especially  a  revised 
judgment  upon  the  authenticity  and  contents  of  the 
documents.  I  must  now  say  a  few  words  about 
those  of  the  charters  which  come  within  the  period 
I  am  dealing  with.  I  will  begin  with  one  or  two 
a  priori  arguments. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  exceedingly  unlikely  that 
Augustine  or  the  monks  who  went  with  him,  or 
belonged  to  his  mission,  would  have  had  with  them 
anyone  skilled  in  the  production  of  charters.  They 
were  going  on  what  was  largely  deemed  a  hopeless 
venture,  and  would  not  be  likely  to  provide  for  the 
contingencyof  drawing  up  charters.  With  the  second 
mission  under  Theodore  the  case  was  different.  The 
Church  had  then  been  already  planted,  and  we  are 
expressly  told  that  he  took  with  him  a  person  skilled 
in  the  art  in  question.  It  is  quite  likely  that  the 
Kentish  king  gave  the  monks  lands,  but  they 
would  not  be  of  the  class  called  bocland  [i.e.  secured 
by  charters),  but  of  the  sort  called  folcla^id,  and 
conveyed  in  a  much  more  primitive  way  by 
what  lawyers  call  livery  of  seisin.  Secondly, 
knowing  as  we  do  Bede's  care  and  zeal  in  treating 
of  the  earliest  history  of  the  English,  and  the  very 
competent  and  learned  correspondents  and  friends 
he  had  to  help  him,  it   is  reasonable  to  treat  all 


xxxviii  INTRODUCTION 

documents  of  this  early  time  which  profess  to  deal 
with  the  English  Church  and  are  not  mentioned  or 
quoted  by  him  with  suspicion.  Quite  a  number  of 
these  exist,  and  may  be  roughly  put  into  two  classes. 
First,  those  which  may  have  been  concocted  more 
or  less  innocently  by  the  custodians  of  the  charters 
in  order  to  give  a  more  stable  and  easily  proved 
title  to  property  already  theirs.  In  this  class  of 
document  we  may  generally  trust  the  descriptions 
and  boundaries  of  the  lands  as  reliable,  since  it 
was  a  very  difficult  matter  in  the  Middle  Ages 
actually  to  appropriate  other  people's  property 
in  the  face  of  a  public  inquest,  which  could  always 
be  demanded  by  the  person  aggrieved.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  terms  of  the  document,  the  names 
it  contains  and  also  the  dates,  and  more  especially 
the  names  of  the  witnesses,  are  generally  entirely 
sophistications. 

A  second  class  of  spurious  documents  is  much 
more  dangerous  and  misleading,  and  consists  of  deeds 
deliberately  forged  for  the  purpose  of  securing  not 
lands  but  privileges  for  various  abbeys.  These 
privileges  generally  consist  in  exemptions  from 
Episcopal  control  and  supervision. 

Thomas  of  Elmham,  In  his  book  on  St.  Augus- 
tine's Monastery,  gives  us  a  number  of  documents  of 
both  classes.  He  was  treasurer  of  the  abbey  in  1407, 
and  there  Is  no  reason  for  attaching  any  suspicion 
to  himself.  He  doubtless  reports  and  copies  what 
he  saw  there.  One  of  the  deeds  he  mentions  was 
in  fact  already  known  to  Sprott,  whose    chronicle 


INTRODUCTION  xxxix 

extended  to  1232,  and  was  thus  written  a  long 
time  before  Elmham's  day.  He  makes  it  the 
foundation  of  his  account  of  a  synod  said  to  have 
been  held  at  Canterbury  in  605  ;  ^  while  another  of 
the  documents,  which  is  sealed  with  a  leaden  bulla, 
is  copied,  with  a  drawing  of  the  bulla,  in  the 
Harleian  MS.  686. 

It  is  pretty  certain  that  at  the  beginning  of  the 
thirteenth  century  there  were  certain  documents  and 
charters  at  St.  Augustine's  Abbey  purporting  to 
belong  to  the  end  of  the  sixth  and  the  first  half  of 
the  seventh  century,  and  that  they  were  accepted  by 
the  three  historians  of  the  abbey — Sprott,  Thorne, 
and  Thomas  of  Elmham  —  as  genuine.  There 
cannot  be  a  doubt  that  they  were  all  forgeries.  The 
evidence  for  this  is  plain,  and  they  have  been  pro- 
nounced to  be  spurious  by  all  recent  scholars, 
including  Kemble,  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  and 
others. 

Let  us  now  try  and  analyse  the  evidence  about 
these  documents.  First,  the  external  evidence. 
On  the  29th  of  August  1168  a  fire  broke  out  at  St. 
Augustine's  Abbey.  It  is  described  by  Thorne,  the 
last  entry  of  whose  chronicle  is  dated  in  1397,  and 
who  tells  us  that  down  to  the  year  1232  his  story  was 
chiefly  based  on  that  of  Thomas  Sprott,  which  is  not 
now  extant.  Thorne  tells  us  that  in  this  fire  many 
charters  perished  "  in  qua  combustione  multae  codi- 
cellae  perierunt.''  We  not  only  have  evidence, 
however,  of  the  destruction  of  the  charters  at  St 

'  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  p.  56. 


xl  INTRODUCTION 

Augustine's,  but  also  of  others  having  been  forged. 
In  the  great  struggle  that  took  place  between  St. 
Augustine's  Abbey  and  the  Archbishop  about 
privileges  in  the  twelfth  century,  it  was  contended 
on  the  part  of  the  latter  that  the  documents 
produced  by  the  monks  were  spurious.  Archbishop 
Richard  says  in  his  letter  to  Pope  Alexander  iii., 
written  about  the  year  1 1 80  :  Moiiasteria  enim  quae 
hoc  beneficiuin  damnatissimae  liberialis,  sive  apos- 
tolica  atLctoritate,  sive,  qtwd  freqitentius  est,  biillis 
adtilterinis,  adcpta  sunt,  phis  inquietudinis,  plus 
inobedientiae,  plus  inopiae  inc2irreru?it :  ideoque  et 
multae  domus,  quae  nominatissiinae  stmt  in  sanctitate 
et  religione,  has  immunitates  attt  nunqttam  habere 
voluertmt,  aut  habitas  contimw  rcjecerimt.  Si  ei^go 
Malmesburiensis  abbas,  qui  aptid  nos  reputatur  arbor 
sterilis,  fiats  fatua,  et  ti^tmcus  inutilis,  ad  nos  venerit, 
velmiserit,  vitam  et  opinioneni  illitts  in  libra  justitiae 
appendatis ;  nee  illitis  admittatis  privilegia,  donee 
manifeste  liqueat,  ex  collatione  scriptztrae  et  bullartt77i, 
quo  teinpore,  et  a  qiiibus  patribus  sunt  indzdta, 
Falsariorum  enim  praestigiosa  malitia  ita  in  episco- 
porum  contumeliani  se  armavit,  td  falsitas  in  omniiun 
fere  monaster iorufn  exemptione  praevaleat,  nisi  in 
decisionibus  et  examinationibus  faciendis  judex 
veritatis  exactor  districtissimus  inter cedat}  The 
suspicions  here  referred  to  were  followed  up  by 
a  challeno^e  to  the  Abbot  of  St.  Augrustine's  to 
show  his  privilegia  in  public,  and  so  vindicate  the 

*  Vide  Peter  of  Blois,  ep.  Ixviii  ;  Hardwick,  Thomas  of  Ebnham, 
XXX,  xxxi. 


INTRODUCTION  xli 

claim  he  had  raised  of  complete  exemption  from 
the  Archbishop's  jurisdiction.  "  The  challenge  was, 
however,  declined  once  and  again  amidst  the  taunts 
and  laughter  of  the  Christ  Church  monks,  who 
asked  exultingly  if  truth  was  fond  of  corners,  or 
if  the  possessors  of  a  genuine  document  were  likely 
at  such  a  crisis  to  shrink  from  public  examination. 
After  a  long  delay  the  matter  was  submitted  to 
the  judgment  of  the  Pontiff,  who  issued  a  commission 
empowering  certain  persons  to  visit  St.  Augustine's, 
to  inspect  the  ancient  privileges,  and  to  forward  their 
report  to  him.  Again,  however,  the  inquiry  was 
delayed  on  account  of  the  invincible  tergiversation 
of  the  monks." ^ 

Fresh  commissioners  were  now  appointed  in  the 
persons  of  the  Bishop  of  Durham  and  the  Abbot  of  St. 
Albans,  in  whose  presence,  only  the  more  important 
of  the  documents  were  produced.  These  consisted 
of  two  of  th.Q  pj'iz'ilegia  professedly  granted  by  King 
.^thelbert  and  one  by  Augustine  (to  be  afterwards 
described),  while  the  rest  of  the  documents  were 
carefully  concealed.  Gervase  of  Canterbury,  a 
champion  of  the  rival  establishment  at  Christ 
Church,  describes  the  result  of  this  examination  in 
some  graphic  phrases:  '' Prohilerunt,"  he  says, 
"  itaque  tandem  aliquando  monachi  abbatis  schedidas 
dttas,  quas  sua  originalia  constanter  esse  dicebant. 
Quarum  pritna  vetustissiiua  erat  rasa  et  subscripta, 
ac    si    esset    e^nendata,    et    absque   sigillo.       Hanc 

^  See   Gervase  of  Canterbury,   Chron.,   col.    145-48 ;   Hardwick, 
Thomas  of  Elmhant,  xxxi  andxxxii. 


xHi  INTRODUCTION 

dicebant  regis  Ethelberti  esse  privilegium.  Alia 
vero  schedula  inulto  erat  recentior,  de  qua  bulla 
plumbea  cum  iconia  episcopi  nova  valde  dependebat. 
Hanc  cartulani  sancti  Atto;ustini  dicebant  esse 
privilegiiim.  In  his  auteni  privilegiis,  iiituentitmi 
judicio,  haec  maxime  notanda  fitertmt :  In  prima 
latcdabilis  quidem  fuit  ■vehcstas,  sed  rasa  fuit  et 
inscripta,  nee  zlIHus  sigilli  munimine  roborata.  In 
alia  vero  repreheiisione  dignum  fuit,  qiiod  nova 
extitit  ejus  littera  et  bulla  czim  vetustatis  esse 
deberet  annorum  quingentoj'um  octoginta,  id  est  a 
tempore  beati  Augustini^  cttjus  esse  dicebatur.  Fztit 
etiam  notatum^  immo  notorium  et  notabile,  quod  bulla 
ipsius  plumbea  fuit,  cum  non  soleant  Cisalpini prae- 
sules  vel  primates  scriptis  S7iis  authenticis  bullas 
plumbeas  apponere.  Models  etiam  Latini  et  forma 
loquendi  a  Romano  stilo  dissona  videbantur.  Haec 
duo  solummodo  privilegia  in  7nedium  prolata  sunt, 
cum  alia  nonnulla  se  habuisse  monachi  jactitarenty^ 
It  will  be  seen,  therefore,  that  suspicions 
existed  as  long  ago  as  the  twelfth  century  in 
regard  to  the  documents  we  are  discussing.  No 
wonder  that  the  whole  process  of  the  securing 
of  privileges  of  exemption,  and  in  fact  of  any 
advantage,  by  the  monks,  was  then  felt  to  be 
steeped  in  chicanery  and  falsification,  and  that 
no  document  relating  to  such  privileges  can 
now  be  accepted  as  genuine  without  the  closest 
inspection.      The  practice  was  virtually  universal, 

*  Gervase,  op.  cit.,  col.   1458  ;   Hardwick,   Thomas  of  Elmham, 
pp.  xxxii  and  xxxiii. 


INTRODUCTION  xliii 

and  good  examples  may  be  found  in  the  whole- 
sale forgeries  (now  universally  admitted  to  be 
such)  among  the  early  charters  of  Peterborough, 
Evesham,  Pershore,  Chertsey,  Malmesbury,  etc. 
etc.  The  practice  of  forgery  was  in  fact  reduced 
to  a  fine  art  by  the  monks,  and  I  cannot  quote  a 
better  proof  than  the  case  of  Croyland  as  described 
by  Ingram  in  the  Archceological  Journal  long  ago. 

By  a  lucky  chance  he  came  upon  the  whole  of 
the  details  of  the  manufacturing  and  forging  of 
the  documents  which  were  afterwards  produced  as 
evidence  in  the  struggle  between  the  Abbeys  of 
Croyland  and  Spalding  in  the  law  courts,  by  which 
the  latter  monastery  was  completely  undone. 

In  regard  to  the  charters  from  St.  Augustine's, 
we  not  only  know  that  they  were  forged,  but  we 
can  actually  recover  the  name  of  the  forger.  This 
information  is  contained  in  a  document  quoted  in 
Wharton's  y^ 7/^/7^2;  Sacra,  1691,  vol.  ii.  preface,  p.  iv. 
It  is  a  letter  of  y^igidius.  Bishop  of  Evreux, 
written  to  Pope  Alexander,  which  is  sealed  with  his 
seal  and  labelled,  ''  Aigidii  Dei  gratia  Ebi^oicensis 
Episcopi,''  and  which  is  itself  endorsed  Contra 
falsa  Privilegia  S.  Aztgustini ;  qualiter  per  unimi 
monachuni  fahariimi  S.  Medardi  adtUterinis  privi- 
legiis  se  nnmierunt.  I  prefer,  in  order  to  avoid 
all  question,  to  quote  it  in  its  original  Latin. 

"  Quavi  gravis  inter  Regem  Henrinmi  et  me 
servum  Vestrae  Sanctitatis  in  initio  nostri  Episco- 
patus  exorta  sit  discordia  pro  repai'atione  libertatis 
Ecclesiarum  Norman,  quae  a  multis  retro  tempor- 


xliv  INTRODUCTION 

ibus  conculcatae  fue^^ant ;  discretioneni  vestrant  non 
credinius  ignorare.       Illius  siquidem  persecutionis 
turbine  motiat  Parochiae  no strae  fines  exire  compulsi^ 
portum  nonnisi  in  Apostolicae  pietatis  sinubus  in- 
venire  potuinius.       Quae    et    quanta    nobis   solatia 
foelicis   memoriae   B.   Innocentius   Papa  contulerit 
vix    mens   potest    concipere    vel    lingua    proferre. 
Inter  quae   hoc   luiuni   quia   ad  modernorum    non 
crediinus  notitiam  pervenisse,    vestrae   Discretioni, 
tanqiMfu    dignum    memoria,  praesentis   scripti   re- 
latione studuimus  intimare.       Dum  B.  Innocentius 
Remis     celebraturus     Concilitim     advenisset ;     me 
minimum    servoi^um  Dei    cum  fratribus    et  filiis 
nostris  ex  more  contigit  interesse.      Inter  caeteros 
autem,  quos   nobiscum   adduximus^  R.  in  Abbatem 
B.  Audoeni,  W.  in  Abbatem  Genmieticensem  electi, 
nee   benedicti,  Apostolico  se  conspectui  in  Abbatum 
ordine  praesentarunt.      Quorum    electio7iem,  iinmo 
dejectionem,    dum    Apostolicis    auribus    inthnarem, 
discreto  more  suo  ab  eis  diligentius  inquisivit,  si  forte 
aliquibus  Privilegiis  autenticis  mtcnirentzcr,  quorum 
patrocinio  eorum  personae  vel  Ecclesiae  a  Metro- 
politani  subjectione  comprobarentur  immunes.     Dtcm 
hae  Apostolica  sollicitudo  diligenti  scrutaretur   in- 
stantia ;     venerabilem    vivum     G.      Catalaunensem 
Episcoptim,  quonda7n  Abbatem  B.  Medardi,  ex  divino 
munere   contigit   affuisse.     Qui,    dum   B.   Audoeni 
Electus    circa    quaestionem    apostolicam    haesitaret, 
nostrae  dubitationi fine77i  imposuit,  et  illitcs praesump- 
tionis  tumorem   antiquae  recordationis  fre^io  com- 
pescuit.      Ait    enim,    quod   dum    iii    Ecclesia   B. 


INTRODUCTION  xlv 

Medardi     Abbatis     officio    fungeretur ;     quendmn 
Gvernonem    nomine  ex    Monachis   suis,    in    ultimo 
confessionis  articulo  se  falsarium  fuisse  confessum^ 
et   inter    caetera,    quae  pei'  dive^^sas  Ecclesias  sig- 
mentando  conscripserat,   Ecclesiam  B.    Audoeni  et 
Ecclesiam  B.  Augustini  de  Cant,  adulterinis  privi- 
legiis  S2Lh  Apostolico  nomine  se  nmnisse,  lamentabihter 
poenitendo   assertiit.        Quin   et   ob    mercedem    ini- 
quitatis    quaedam   se  pretiosa    ornamenta    recepisse 
confesstLs  est,  et  ad  B.  Medardi  Eclesiam  detulisse. 
Qtio  audito  B.  Innocentius  praedictum  est  sciscitatus 
Episcopzwi,  si  qiLod  de  plana    interlocutus  fuerat, 
jusjurandi  religione  firmaret  f     Quod  se  facturum 
vir   Dei,  religionis  et   veritatis    ainator,  propostiit. 
Quo  audito  Dominus  Papa :  Eia,  inquit,  mi  frater 
carissime,  indue   te    ornamentis  dignitatis  tuae,   et 
praesentibus  Electis  sub professione  canonica  7namim 
benedictionis  inpone :    qttod  ego  impetrata  licentia 
aggressus  sum.     Ipse  quod  mirabile  dictu  est,  venera- 
bilium patriim  conventum  ejus  adventum  expectanttum 
ingredi    super sedit ;    quoad  ego   secum    intraturus, 
benedict  is  7nte  Abbatibus,  advenirciu.      Haec  Pater 
Sanctissime  vobis  duximus  exaranda ;  exorantes,  ut 
si  praedictas  Ecclesias  contra   institutiones  patrias 
aliquid    usurpare  fuerit    comprobatum ;    vos  more 
solito  et  debito  Ecclesiis   sinzuHs  suam  conservetis 
in  omnibus  aequitatem. 

"  Venerabili  Patri  ac  Domino  charissitno 
Alexandro  Dei  gratia  S.  R.  E.  Summo  Pontifici 
E.  eadem  gratia  Ebroicensis  Ecclesiae  humths 
minister,    servus   tuae    Sanctitatis,   obedientiam  de- 


xlvi  INTRODUCTION 

votam  et  reverentiam.  Quae  in  schedula  scripta 
sunt,  quain  vobis  cum  sigillo  7iostro  Cantuariensis 
praesentat  Ecciesia,  ab  ore  bonae  ntemoriae  Hugonis 
q2tondam  Rothoniagensis  Ecclesiae  Archiepiscopi, 
pair  is  et  patrtti  niei,  accepiums,  et  sigillo  suo  signata 
ad  B.  Tkomam  et  Ecclesiain  Cantuariensein  t^'ans- 
viissimus ;  tit  Veritas  recordationis  antiquae  eoriini 
presufnptionein  compescat,  qui  in  spirittt  ei^roris  et 
spiritu  mendacii  indebitain  sibi  vindicant  libertateni. 
Privilegia  autem,  quae  ex  confessione  Gaufridi  Cata- 
lanensis  Episcopi  in  praesentia  Saiictae  recordationis 
Innocentii  Papae  adulterina  probata  sunt,  et praedicto 
Domino  nostro  Archiepiscopo  reddita,  de  mandato 
ejitsdemDomininostri  igni  covibiu^endapropriis  mani- 
bus  tradidimus.  Conservet  Deus  personam  vestram 
Ecclesiae  sitae  per  tempora  longiora  incohimem.''^ 

These  are  only  samples,  and  may  be  compared 
with  the  much  greater  and  more  far-reaching 
forging  of  decretals  and  Papal  Bulls,  etc.,  in  the 
early  ninth  century,  to  sustain  the  increasing  and 
audacious  ambition  of  the  Holy  See,  which  decretals 
were  supported  by  many  Popes,  and  by  the  most 
learned  Cardinals  and  Canonists,  while  most  out- 
rageous pretensions  were  based  on  them,  which  are 
now  treated  as  mere  discreditable  litter  by  honest 
men  of  all  schools  and  of  all  faiths.  I  should  hardly 
have  given  so  much  room  to  these  facts  but  for  the 
extraordinary  point  of  view  still  maintained  in 
certain  quarters  by  those  persons  who  claim  for 
ecclesiastical   documents  that  they  virtually  attest 

^  Op.  cit,  v.,  vi. 


INTRODUCTION  xlvii 

themselves  without  proof  and  do  not  need  to  be 
stringently  verified  before  they  are  accepted.  Take, 
for  instance,  the  very  latest  historian  of  the  Popes, 
Father  Mann,^  who  has  exceeded  all  other  recent 
apologists  in  the  absence  of  critical  intelligence  in 
dealinof  with  historical  evidence.  In  reoard  to  the 
very  documents  we  are  discussing  (against  which, 
as  we  have  just  seen,  the  external  evidence  is 
complete)  he  thinks  he  has  established  their 
authority  by  quoting  the  uncritical  writers  of 
another  age.  Thus  he  says  :  "  In  their  Monasticon 
and  Syiiodicon  Dugdale  and  Wilkins  have  re- 
spectfully registered  the  Catholic  title-deeds  of 
Old  England.  That  was  to  show  wisdom  and 
patriotism  "  ! !  ! 

It  is  fortunate  for  the  cause  of  historical  truth 
that  this  has  not  been  the  way  in  which  the  problem 
has  been  approached  by  all  the  great  critics  of 
another  day  and  of  our  time.  G.  Hickes,  the 
most  learned  of  Anglo-Saxon  scholars  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  devotes  a  part  of  his  great 
Thesaurus  to  a  discussion  of  spurious  docu- 
ments and  the  method  of  testing  them.  One  of 
the  most  critical  tests  he  insists  on  (and  he  had 
a  very  wide  experience),  is  that  no  genuine  Eng- 
lish documents  before  the  reio-n  of  Charlemao^ne 
are  dated  by  the  year  of  the  Incarnation,  but  by 
Indictions,  etc.  Thus  he  says :  Nam  prima  et 
secunda  chartae  is  this  codicis,  quae  Mthelberhti  I, 
regis  nomine  factae  sunt,  confedae  esse  dicuntur  Anno 

*  op.  cit.  i.  402,  etc. 


xlviii  INTRODUCTION 

ab  incarnatione  Christ i  DCV.  indictione  odava. 
Veruin  chart  as  istas  7ion  modo  "  non  liberas  a  suspi- 
cioiie"  ut  pro  vwdestia  loquitur  Spebnannwn^  sed 
plane  falsas,  illius  arguinenta,  quibtts  addi possunt, 
ostendunt.  Quatnobreiu  annum  Christi  incarna- 
tionis  ad  annum  indie tionis,  ineunii,  ant  provecto 
septinio  seculo,  chartis  accessisse  tantum  abest,  ut 
constet ;  ut  de  eo  maximum  incertum  sit.  Vei^um 
inito  octavo  seculo  eove  haud  multum  promoto,  in 
designandis  chartarum  temporibus  ad  annum  indic- 
tionis  annus  dominicae  incarnationis  frequentius  jam 
turn  usitatus  accessit,  ut  in  carta  Mthelbaldi  regis  in 
superioribus  .  .  .  citata? 

The  acute  and  able  analysis  which  Hickes 
applied  to  testing  the  legitimacy  of  Anglo-Saxon 
documents  has  been  in  almost  every  case  accepted 
by  modern  critics,  and  notably  his  chief  touch- 
stone— namely,  the  method  of  dating  documents. 
Professor  Earle  agrees  in  the  main  with  Hickes, 
differing  only  in  a  small  matter.  Speaking  of  the 
introduction  of  the  method  of  dating  from  the  Incar- 
nation, he  says :  "  Bede  was  the  first  to  plant  it  in 
Literature,  as  in  his  De  Tempor2C7n  Ratioue,  cap.  45, 
entitled  De  Annis  Do7ninicae  Incarnationis^  and  still 
more  conspicuously  in  his  History,  which  is  chrono- 
logically framed  upon  it.  Indeed,  this  way  of 
reckoning  time  holds  so  conspicuous  a  place  in 
the  structure  of  his  History  as  to  suggest  that  the 
skeleton  of  his  work  was  a  series  of  annals 
arranged    upon    a    scale    of    years    Anno    Domini, 

*  ConctL,  p.  125.  2  Hickes,  Diss.  Efiist.  80. 


INTRODUCTION  xlix 

like  the  work  of  those  English  chroniclers  who 
must  be  regarded  as  his  successors  in  the  historical 
office.  .  .  .  The  chronological  evidence  of  our  early- 
documents,  so  far  as  it  goes,  tends  to  the  same 
conclusion.  ...  If  we  take  a  series  of  eight 
documents  at  the  highest  date  where  such  a  series 
can  be  formed,  with  a  certainty  of  their  genuine- 
ness, they  will  be  of  the  following  years :  679, 
692,  697,  732,  734,  736,  746,  759.  These  docu- 
ments have  been  selected  as  a  true  representative 
series  of  the  first  quality  ;  and  of  this  series  the 
first  five,  though  all  more  or  less  dated,  whether 
by  the  month,  or  the  regnal  year,  or  the  Indiction, 
or  by  all  these  at  once,  have  not  the  year  Anno 
Domini.  On  the  other  hand,  the  last  three  aofree 
in  using  the  era,  and  from  this  time  the  practice 
is  continuous.  In  the  intervening  year,  which 
breaks  this  series  into  two  parts,  falls  the  death 
of  Bede,  a.d.  735,  and  this  coincidence  harmonises 
with  the  rest  of  the  evidence  in  associating  this 
great  practical  improvement  with  the  Anglian  his- 
torian and  chronolog-ist."^ 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  documents  cited  by 
Thomas  of  Elmham,  from  the  collection  of  charters 
at  St.  Augustine's.  Of  these  he  copies  out  the  one 
he  calls  Carta  I.  in  facsimile  in  a  cursive  hand,  and 
also  in  what  he  calls  scriptura  moderfia.  It  professes 
to  be  a  grant  by  ^thelberht  of  a  certain  piece  of 
land  of  his  own  ("juris  mei,"  he  says)  lying  in  the 

^  Earle,  Land  Charters  and  Saxon   Documents^  Intr.  xxxii   and 
xxxiii. 


1  INTRODUCTION 

eastern  part  of  Canterbury  round  about  the  Church 
of  St.  Pancras.  This  charter  is  marked  as  spurious 
by  Kemble/and  is  so  treated  by  Haddan  and  Stubbs.^ 
This  conclusion  follows,  inter  alia,  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  dated  by  the  Incarnation.  Birch  adds  an 
attesting  clause  and  the  names  of  several  witnesses.^ 

This  document  is  one  of  the  sophistications 
which  was  doubtless  meant  to  supply  a  genuine 
deed  that  had  been  destroyed.  The  only  part  of 
the  charter  which  is  acceptable  is  that  containing 
the  boundaries  of  the  land  conveyed,  which  runs 
thus  :  In  oriente  ecclesia  Sancti  Martini ;  in  meridie 
via  of  (sic)  Burhgat ;  in  occidente  et  in  aquilone 
Drutingestraete. 

The  next  deed  is  marked  Carta  II.  by  Thomas  of 
Elmham((9/.^zV.  1 1 1  and  1 1 2),  and  professes  to  convey 
certain  lands  called  Langport  from  yEthelberht  to 
the  Abbey  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul.  This  is  also 
given  in  two  forms,  in  facsimile  and  in  a  more  recent 
writing.  The  charter'*  is  also  marked  as  spurious 
by  Kemble,  and,  like  the  previous  one,  was  doubtless 
concocted  to  establish  a  written  title  in  lieu  of  one 
dependent  on  reputation,  for  the  lands  it  concerns. 
It  is  also  dated  by  the  Incarnation  and  attested  by  the 
King,  by  his  son  ^dbald  or  Eadbald,  by  Augustine, 
whose  name  occurs  between  these  two,  and  by  a  num- 
ber of  witnesses  whose  names  are  impossible  and  quite 
imaginary — namely,  Hamigisil  dux,   Hocca  comes, 

^  Vol.  i.  2.  2  iii_  ^2,  etc.  etc. 

^  These  are  only  found  in  MS.  Harl.  358,  f.  475.    They  are  appar- 
ently corruptly  copied  from  the  similar  clause  in  the  next  charter. 
*  CD.  vol.  i.  3  ;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  op.  cit.  iii.  53  and  56, 


INTRODUCTION  li 

Augemund  referendarius,  Grapho  (sic)  Comes,  Tani- 
gisil  regis  optimas  Pinca  and  Geddi.  What  are  names 
and  titles  like  Grapho  and  Comes  doingina  document 
of  the  sixth  century?^  The  boundaries  doubtless 
represent  those  of  an  estate  belonging  to  the  Abbey. 
They  are  /71  oriente  ccclesia  saiicti  Martini.  Et  inde 
ad  orientein  be  Siwendoune.  Et  sic  ad  aguilonem  be 
Wycingesmarce.  Itertnnque  ad  orientem  et  ad 
aMstruni  be  Burhivaremarce.  Et  sic  ad  atistrtnn  et 
occidentem  be  Cyningesmarce.  Item  ad  aquilonem  et 
orientem  be  Cyningesuiarce.  Sicqtie  ad  occidentem 
to  Riderescaepe.  Et  ita  ad  aquilonem  to  Druting- 
straete.  Sprott  founds  upon  this  charter  an  imagin- 
ary council  of  Canterbury,  where  it  was  professedly 
confirmed,^  To  this  Council  Elmham  also  devotes  a 
paragraph.  He  goes  on  to  say  that  it  met  on  the  5th 
of  January  605,  and  was  attended  by  ^thelberht,  his 
wife  Bertha,  his  son  /Edbald,  and  St.  Augustine.^ 

The  third  charter  given  by  Elmham  refers  to  a 
grant  by  ^^thelberht  of  lands  at  Sturigao,  other- 
wise called  Cistelet.  This  is  also  given  in  dupli- 
cate,— one  in  early  cursive  and  the  other  in  later 
script,  and  in  it  the  king  professes  to  have  had 
it  written  out  by  Augemund.  It  is  professedly 
witnessed  by  Augustine,  the  Archbishop,  by  Bishops 
Mellitus  and  Justus  of  London  and  Rochester,  by 
the  king's  son  ^dbald,  by  Hamigisil,  Augemund 
the  referendarius.  Counts  Hocca  and  Graphio,  and 

*  These  witnesses  also  attest  with  different  words  (a  quite  fantastic 
process),  as  coftfirmavt,  subscripsi,  favi,  laudavi,  consensi,  approbavi, 
benedixi,  corroboravi. 

^  See  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  p.  56.  "  Op.  cit.  no,  \\i. 


Hi  INTRODUCTION 

Tanigisil,  Pinca,  Geddi,  and  Aldhun,  optimates,  quite 
impossible  names,  and  by  many  others  whose  names 
are  not  given.  Those  which  are  given  quite  condemn 
the  document.  It  is  marked  as  spurious  by  Kemble 
and  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  and  is  dated  in  the  forty- 
fifth  year  of  the  king's  reign,  on  the  5th  of  the  Ides 
of  January.  Dr.  Bright  refers  to  it  as  "  the  spurious 
charter  of  y^thelberht  marked  as  third,  which,"  as 
he  says,  "uses  remarkable  language,  thus:  Cum 
consilio  .  .  .  Archipraesulis  Augustini.  Ex  suo 
sancto  sanctorum  collegio  venerabilem  viruni,  secum 
ab  apostolica  sede  directum.  Pet7'um  monackum  elegi 
eisque  ut  ccclesiasticiis  ordo  exposcit  abbatcin  prae- 
postii}  The  following  passage  breathes  the  air  of 
quite  a  different  period :  Qiwd  monasterium  ant 
ecclesiam,  ntdlus  episcoporwn,  nulhis  siiccessorum 
meorum  regum  in  aliquo  laedere  aut  inquietare 
praesumat,  nuliam  omnino  szibjectionem  in  ea  sibi 
ttsurpare  azcdeat,  sed  Abbas  ipse  qui  ibi  fuerit 
ordinatus,  intzis  ct  foris  cznn  consilio  fratrum, 
secundum  lienor  em  Dei  libere  eam  regat  et  ordinet'' 
etc.  There  are  no  boundaries  given  in  this  charter, 
and  it  looks,  from  the  last  clause  quoted,  as  if  it 
had  been  concocted  by  the  Monk  of  St.  Medard. 

The  fourth  document  as  numbered  by  Thomas 
of  Elmham  is  the  so-called  bull  of  Saint  Augustine, 
in  which  he  is  alleo"ed  to  have  conferred  great 
privileges  on  the  Abbey  of  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul,  and  of  which  Elmham  says,  ''  Eja,  vere  nostra 
Augustea  regia.''     It  is  also  given  in  two  forms  in  an 

^  Op.  cit..  Early  English  Church  History,  3id  ed.,  105,  note  i. 


INTRODUCTION  liii 

early  and  a  late  script,  together  with  a  drawing  of 
the  seal  or  bulla,  which  was  made  of  lead.  The  use 
of  such  pendent  bullae  at  that  time  having  been  con- 
tested by  some,  Elmham  professes  to  reply  and  to 
quote  the  example  of  a  foreign  bishop  who  had  used 
one,  as  was  alleged  by  Philip,  Count  of  Flanders. 
Elmham  says  the  particular  bulla  on  the  document 
we  are  discussing  contained  a  representation  of  the 
Virgin  and  Child  with  a  legend  round  it  which  could 
hardly  be  read  [qtiae  legi poterit,  niinime  apparente). 
The  foreign  example  he  had  quoted  contained  the 
figure  of  an  abbot,  and  was,  he  urged,  apparently 
the  seal  of  some  abbey  dedicated  to  St.  Stephen.^ 
It  was  clearly  a  document  of  much  later  date. 

This  Privilege  of  Augustine  is  marked  as 
spurious  by  Kemble.  Bright  says  of  it :  "a  docu- 
ment called  a  bulla  or  privilegium  sub  bulla  plumbea, 
professing  to  come  from  Augustine  and  exhorting 
his  successors  to  ordain  the  Abbots  of  this  monas- 
tery, but  not  to  claim  authority  over  them,  and  to 
treat  them  as  colleao^ues  in  the  Lord's  work,  is 
clearly  an  Augustinian  invention."  He  adds  that 
its  language  betrays  it.^ 

While  the  four  documents  just  analysed  have 
been  rejected  as  spurious  by  all  modern  scholars, 
the  next  one  I  am  turning  to,  has  been  generally 
treated  as  genuine,  notably  by  Kemble,  Professor 
Earle,  and  Haddan  and  Stubbs.  I  am  afraid  that, 
so  far  as  I  can  see,  it  must  be  put  in  the  same 
category    with    the    rest.      It    is    contained    in    a 

1  Op.  cii.  122,  123.  2  Qp^  elf  104^  note  5. 

e 


liv  INTRODUCTION 

volume  devoted  to  documents  chiefly  referring  to 
Rochester,  put  together  by  Ernulf,  Bishop  of  that  See, 
and  known  as  the  Texttis  Roffensis.  Bishop  Ernulf 
had  once  a  better  reputation  than  he  has  now.  As  I 
have  shown  elsewhere,  thereare  grounds  for  believing 
that  he  was  at  the  back  of,  and  responsible  for,  the 
Peterborough  forgeries.  He  was  Abbot  of  Peter- 
borough  before  he  became  Bishop,  and  I  have  little 
doubt  that  he  would  have  had  few  scruples  in  regard 
to  manufacturing  a  document  if  a  title  deed  was 
missing  or  some  privilege  was  to  be  secured. 

The  document  in  question  has  been  said  to  bear 
no  suspicious  contents,  and  it  was  certainly  spoken 
of  in  high  terms  by  the  father  of  Anglo-Saxon 
studies,  namely,  Hickes.  Earle  quotes  the  latter's 
very  favourable  view  of  it  contained  in  the  following 
words  :  "  Exstantvero  {chartae)  quae  vii.  seculo  inito, 
et  deinceps  confectae  erant,  vettistissimae.  Scilicet 
charta  JEthelberti  I.  regis  Cantiiaroruin,  omnium 
antiquisima  .  .  .  cujus  apogi'aphum-  exstat  in 
"  Textus  Roffenis,''  folio  i  \(^a,  .  .  .  quae  omnimodam 
ve7'itatis  speciem  prae  se  ferty  ^ 

The  contents  of  the  charter  seems  to  me 
entirely  to  condemn  it.  Thus  it  is  dated  the  4th  of 
the  Kalends  of  May,  Indiction  vii.,  i.e.  28th  April 
604,  and  yet  entirely  ignores  Augustine  and  refers 
to  his  successor  as  "the  Bishop  of  Canterbury"; 
but  since  Augustine  did  not  die  till  the  26th  of  May, 
this  seems  conclusive  in  regard  to  the  genuineness 
of   the  charter.     In  addition  to  this  difficulty  the 

^  Diss.  Ep,  p.  79. 


INTRODUCTION  Iv 

wording  of  the  charter  is  singular.  In  it  y^thel- 
berht  commends  his  son  Eadbald  to  the  CathoHc 
faith  in  an  odd  phrase  :  Ego  Mthelberhtus  Rex  filio 
vieo  Eadbaldo  adnionitionem  catholicae  fideioptabilem. 
It  ends  with  the  words  :  Hoc  ami  consilio  Laiirencii 
Episcopi  et  omnium  principzwz  7neoTiim,  signo  sanctae 
crucis  coiifirniavi,  eosque  jussi  iU  mecimi  idem  face- 
rent.  Amen.  There  are  no  signatures  of  the 
witnesses,  who  are  thus  said  to  have  attested  it. 
Again  Rochester  is  called  Hrofibrevis,  which  is 
ridiculous.  Its  Roman  name  was  Diirobrevis,  while 
the  English  called  it  Hrofa,  Hrofeceaster,  or  Rofe- 
ceaster.  And  of  Justus  its  bishop  it  is  said  :  ubi 
praeesse  videtur  Justus  Episcoptis.  "  Ubi  praeesse 
videtur''  could  hardly  be  applied  in  a  Rochester 
document  to  the  then  Bishop  of  the  See.  Again, 
the  conveyance  is  not  as  usual  to  the  Bishop,  but 
to  St.  Andrew  himself.  The  King  is  made  to  say  : 
tibi,  Sancte  Andrea,  ttiaeque  ecclesiae  .  .  .  trado 
aliqtiantulum  telluris  viei. 

While  I  have  no  doubt  myself  that  the  charter 
is  spurious,  it  is  pretty  certain  that  the  boundaries 
mentioned  in  it  really  describe  property  once  be- 
longing to  the  church  at  Rochester.  They  are  set 
out  in  the  vernacular  (which  is  another  suspicious 
circumstance  at  this  date)  :  fram  Sudgeate  zvest, 
andlanges  wealles,  od  nordlanan  to  straete  ;  and' swa 
east  frain  straete  od  doddingkyj'nan  ongean  bradgeat." 
The  letter  is  given  by  Kemble,  and  in  his  work 
heads  the  whole  list  of  A.S.  charters.^ 

^  See  also  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  52. 


Ivi  INTRODUCTION 

I  may  here  add  diat  Dr.  Bright  says  that  the 
Rochester  tradition  is  that  /lithelberht  gave  to  the 
church  there  some  land  called  Priestfield,  south  of 
the  city,  and  other  land  towards  the  east,  and  quotes 
Anglia  Sacra,  1.  333. 

Another  charter  connected  with  King  ^Ethelberht 
professes  to  convey  some  land  at  Tillingham  to 
Mellitus,  Bishop  of  London.  The  deed  is  pre- 
served among  the  documents  at  St.  Paul's,  and  was 
published  by  Kemble  in  vol.  V.  of  his  great  col- 
lection, and  is  there  numbered  DCCCCLXXXII. 
It  is  undated,  which  is  itself  a  fatal  defect.  It  is 
No.  9  in  Birch's  "  Cartularium  "^  and  is  marked  as 
spurious  by  Kemble,  and  printed  among  the 
questionable  and  spurious  documents  by  Haddan 
and  Stubbs.  It  will  be  noted  as  significant  that  in 
it  yEthelberht,  King  of  Kent,  is  the  king  who  pro- 
poses to  convey  the  property,  while  London  was 
in  the  kingdom  of  Essex.  The  witnesses  are  all 
impossible  names  at  that  time,  and  include  Bishop 
Hunfrid,  Bishop  Lothaire  (Letharius),  Abban, 
^thelwald,  and  ^swina,  and  the  attestation  ends 
with  the  words  et  a/iorMin  i?mltoru7ii,  showing 
that  the  deed  at  St.  Paul's  cannot  at  all  events 
be  the  original.  Bishop  Browne  reminds  us  that 
this  estate  of  Tillingham  is  still  in  the  possession 
of  the  Dean  and  Chapter. 

The  next  document  we  have  to  deal  with  is  given 
by  Elmham,^  and  was  also  known  to  Thorne.^     It 

^  See  also  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  59.  ^  Pp.  129  and  131. 

^  See  col.  1766. 


INTRODUCTION  Ivii 

professes  to  be  a  bull    of  Pope  Boniface    the   4th 

addressed    to    King    yEthelberht,    and    conferring 

special  privileges  on  the    Monastery  of   St.   Peter 

and  St.  Paul.     It  is  marked  as  spurious  by  Kemble. 

Haddan    and    Stubbs    also    expressly    treat    it    as 

spurious.      It  is    dated  the  3rd  of  the   Kalends  of 

March,  in  the  eighth  year  of  the  reign  of  Phocas 

and  the   14th   Indiction,  i.e.  the  27th  of  February 

6ri.      In  it  Boniface  professes  to  control  the  whole 

Church,  per  itniversiun  orbeni  diffusae  ciwaingerimus, 

and  to  be  acting  with  the  authority  of  St.  Peter. 

He  proceeds  to  grant  privileges  of  exemption  quite 

unknown  at  that  time.      He  says  {inter  alia),  Unde 

interdicimus  in  nomine  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi 

ex  aiictoritate  ipsius  beatissimi  apostolortun    prin- 

cipis  Petri,  cujus  vice  huic  Roinanae  praesidemzis 

ecclesiae,    lU  a  praesenti  nullus  praesulum,   mtllus 

saectilarium  praesumat  in  dominium  htijtts  ecclesiae 

aliquo  modo  sese  ingerere,  vel  quamlibet  imperandi 

potestatem  sibi  2isu7^pare,  vel  alicujus  inqtdetudinis 

molestias  inferre,  vel  aliquam  oninino  consuetudinem, 

quamvis  levissimam,  sibi  attribuere,  vel  etiam,  nisi 

7^ogatu  abbatis   aut  fratrum,  in  ea   missas  facere. 

etc.  etc. 

Certain  decrees  professing  to  be  those  published 
by  a  Council  at  Rome  which  was  attended  by  Bishop 
Mellitus  are  extant.  They  have  been  treated, 
however,  as  spurious  by  those  who  have  examined 
them,  and  are  so  called  by  Haddan  and  Stubbs.^ 
They    are    derived    from    a    very    tainted    source, 

^  Op.  cit.  iii.  62-64. 


Iviii  INTRODUCTION 

namely,  Gratian,  chap,  xvi.,  and  by  him  from  Ivo, 
Decretales,  vii,  22.^  Dr.  Bright  calls  the  decrees 
"an  absurd  forgery,"-  and  he  especially  refers  for 
proof  to  the  following  sentence  in  which  monks 
are  spoken  of  as  being-  authorised  to  act  as  priests  : 
'^  Sunt  nonnulli  fulti  mdlo  doginate,  audacissime 
quidem  zelo  magis  aniaritudinis  quam  dilectione 
infiaminati,  asserentes  monachos,  quia  imindo  mortui 
stmt  et  Deo  vivtint  sacerdotalis  officii  potentia  in- 
dignos  neque  poenitentiam  neque  Christianitatem 
largiri  neque  absolvere  posse  per  sacerdotali  officio 
Divinitus  ijijunctam  potestatein^ 

We  must  now  turn  to  another  series  of  notorious 
forgeries  preserved  in  the  Gesta  Pontificum  of 
William  of  Malmesbury.  "These,"  say  Haddan 
and  Stubbs,  "  were  produced  for  the  first  time  by 
Lanfranc  in  1072  a.u.  at  the  Council  of  London, 
for  the  purpose  of  establishing  the  supremacy 
of  Canterbury  over  York,  then  fiercely  disputed, 
and  they  were  confessed  by  Lanfranc  himself 
at  the  time  to  be  relics  of  the  fire  at  Canterbury 
which  four  years  previously  had  destroyed  both 
originals  and  copies  of  all  other  documents.^  These 
letters  are  not  mentioned  by  the  English  bishops 
in  their  letter  to  Pope  Leo  iii.  in  801  a.d.,  although 
they  would  have  been  directly  to  their  purpose, 
and  although  they  do  mention  in  some  detail 
the  series  of  letters  in  Bede  relating  to  the 
position    of    the    see    of    Canterbury.       Moreover, 

^  See  Mansi,  x.  504.  ^113,  note  2. 

2  See  Eadmer,  Hist.^  Nov.  I. 


INTRODUCTION  Hx 

the  Malmesbury  series  of  letters  and  the  Bede 
series,  of  which  the  latter  are  unquestionably 
genuine,  present  in  several  instances  pairs  of  letters 
from  the  same  Pope  to  the  same  Archbishop  at 
the  same  date  and  of  different  tenor.  The  view 
maintained  in  one  series  of  these  documents,  of  the 
original  position  of  Canterbury  relatively  to  London 
and  York,  and  of  the  steps  by  which  that  original 
position  was  gradually  changed,  differs  irrecon- 
cileably  from  the  view  in  support  of  which  the 
other  and  much  later  series  was  produced.  The 
letters  of  this  later  date  represent  Canterbury  as 
intended  from  the  time  of  Justus,  if  not  of  Laur- 
entius,  nay  even  by  Gregory  himself,  to  be  the  seat 
of  the  primacy  of  England,  including  York.  Those 
of  earlier  date  represent  it  as  in  the  first  instance 
not  intended  to  be  the  seat  of  an  archiepiscopate 
at  all ;  and  when  circumstances  had  determined 
this  much  in  its  favour  in  opposition  to  London, — 
a  step  apparently  taken  formally  on  the  accession 
of  Justus,  yet  possibly  on  that  of  Mellitus, — then 
as  being  placed  on  a  level  with  York  and  no 
more, — a  step  dating  with  Archbishop  Honorius  in 
634  A.D.,  while  Theodore's  conduct  first  obtained 
a  superiority  over  York  (669  a.d.  sg.)  in  point  of 
fact,  and  it  was  not  until  the  time  of  Anselm  that 
a  similar  superiority  was  established  in  point  of 
right." ^  Plummer,  commenting  on  this  issue,  says 
of  the  Malmesbury  letters  that  "they  lie  under  the 
gravest    suspicion   of  having  been  forged.   ...    It 

^  Oy>.  cit.  iii.  65  and  66. 


Ix  INTRODUCTION 

is  to  be  hoped  that  he  {i.e.  Lanfranc)  had  nothing 
to  do  with  their  composition."  He  says  that  the 
conclusion  of  Haddan  and  Stubbs  errs  if  at  all 
on  the  side  of  leniency/ 

The  first  of  these  forged  Malmesbury  letters 
professes  to  have  been  written  by  Pope  Boniface  iv. 
to  y^thelberht,  and  to  have  been  sent  by  Bishop 
Mellitus  in  the  reign  of  Archbishop  Laurence. 
Brig-ht  calls  the  letter  an  Ausfustinian  invention 
meant  to  establish  the  superiority  of  that  com- 
munity over  others.^  The  following  sentence  has 
entirely  the  sound  of  a  much  later  age  :  "  Quae 
nostra  decTcta,  si  quis  sticcessoruvi  vestroj'um  sive 
regum  sive  Episcoporu7n,  clericorum  sive  laicoruni 
ii^rita  facer e  tentaverit,  a  principe  Apostolorum 
Petro  et  a  cunctis  successoribus  siiis  anathematis 
vinculo  subjaceat,''  etc^  The  letter  is  dated  Anno 
Dominicae  Incarnationis  615,  a  mode  of  dating 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  belongs  to  a  much  later 
time,  while  the  date  itself  cannot  be  equated  with 
the  journey  of  Mellitus  to  Rome.  Thomas  of 
Elmham,  in  order  to  get  over  the  difficulty,  invents 
a  second  journey  of  Mellitus  to  Rome  in  615.* 
Plummer  suggests  that  this  statement  of  Elmham 
is  probably  a  mere  inference  from  the  erroneous 
date  in  Malmesbury.''  He  was  not  the  only 
person  who  was  mystified  by  it.  Haddan  and 
Stubbs  say  :  "  The  date  of  the  particular  letter  with 

^  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  54.  -  Op.  cit.  113,  note. 

'  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  65.  *  Op.  cit.  Tit.  iii.  5. 

^  Op.  cit.  ii.  84. 


INTRODUCTION  Ixi 

which  we  are  here  concerned  is  plainly  erroneous 
as  it  stands  in  W.  Malms.  Spelman,  from  the  MS. 
Annals  of  Peterborough,  has  a  copy  with  a  different 
date  equally  erroneous.^  He  says  :  acttim  sane  anno 
Incarnationis  sexcentcsiuio  quarto  decimo,  iinperante 
Foca  August 0  piisswio,  anno  wtperii  ejusdem  prin- 
cipis  octavo,  Indictione  xiv.  tertio  die  Martiarum, 
Mthelbej'ti  regis  regni  anno  quinquagesimo 
tertio,  which  he  would  correct  into  sexcentesimo 
decimo  and  (with  another  MS.)  '  Indictione  xiii.' 
Ussher,  from  a  MS.  in  the  Cotton  Library  once 
belonging  to  St.  Augustine's,  gives  a  like  date  to 
that  in  Spelman  except  that  the  Indiction  is  xiii. 
and  the  day  is  quart  a  Kalendarzim,  with  no  month 
added."  Haddan  and  Stubbs  then  continue  :  "  The 
true  date,  if  the  letter  be  genuine,  is  6io  a.d., 
eighth  year  of  Phocas,  thirteenth  Indiction,  and 
the  fiftieth  year  of  Ethelbert  according  to  Bede's 
reckoning,  the  forty-fifth  according  to  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  Chronicle.''  ^  This  is,  of  course,  a  mere 
hypothesis  of  the  two  writers.  It  was  most  mis- 
leading of  them  to  put  it  at  the  head  of  the  letter 
in  the  text,  as  if  it  had  any  real  foundation  ;  and 
they  have  misled  Mr.  Birch,  who  has  also  put  the 
letter  between  the  years  6io  and  6ii. 

It  is  well  to  note  that  this  forgery  was  quoted 
in  the  letter  of  Pope  Alexander  ii.  to  Lanfranc 
as  reported  by  Eadmer.  "  This,"  say  Haddan  and 
Stubbs,  "was  after  1072  a.d." — i.e.  after  the  year 
of  the  famous  Lanfranc  forgeries. 

^  S.I.  130  ;  W.  App.  iv.  735.  ^  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  66. 


Ixii  INTRODUCTION 

It  is  clear  from  this  analysis  that  none  of  the 
papal  letters  or  of  the  other  documents,  domestic 
or  foreign,  which  profess  to  secure  privileges  for 
English  monasteries  or  to  convey  lands  to  them  from 
the  death  of  Pope  Gregory  to  that  of  Boniface  iv. 
and  not  contained  in  Bede  are  genuine.  With  Boni- 
face v.  we  again  meet  with  a  document  having  some 
claim  to  authenticity,  and  of  which  the  best  warranty 
is  that  it  is  contained  in  Bede.  I  mean  the  letter 
which  Pope  Boniface  sent  with  the  pallium  to 
Archbishop  Justus.  We  will  pass  this  by  at 
present,  and  revert  to  it  when  discussing  Bede  later 
on.  This  is  not  the  only  letter,  however,  which  has 
come  down  to  us  associated  with  Pope  Boniface  v. 
and  Justus.  Another  one  is  preserved  in  the  series 
recorded  by  William  of  Malmesbury,  which,  as  we 
have  seen,  are  now  treated  as  forsferies  of  the 
eleventh  century  prepared  for  Lanfranc  when  he 
was  having  his  polemic  in  regard  to  the  primacy 
of  Canterbury.  This  is  the  special  subject  of  the 
letter  in  question.  It  is  marked  by  Haddan  and 
Stubbs  as  "questionable."  What  this  word  really 
means  with  them  must  be  gathered  from  their 
discussion  of  the  Malmesbury  charters  already 
referred  to.^ 

Of  the  letters  alleged  to  have  been  written  by 
Boniface  v.  to  Justus  and  to  iEdwin  and  iEthelberga 
of  Northumbria  two  are  cited  by  Bede,  and  there- 
fore stand  on  a  different  footing  to  those  already 
quoted.     One  of  the  three,  however,  is   not  con- 

Op.  cii.  iii.  p.  65,  note. 


INTRODUCTION  Ixiii 

tained  in  Bede.  It  refers  to  the  privileges  and 
primacy  of  Canterbury,  and  is  one  of  the  too  well- 
known  Malmesbury  group.  It  is  marked  as  ques- 
tionable by  Haddan  and  Stubbs,^  and  analysed  by 
Plummer,^  and  must  be  included  in  the  strictures 
of  these  able  critics  on  that  collection.  I  shall 
have  more  to  say  of  the  other  two  letters  of 
Boniface  v.   reported  by  Bede,  farther  on. 

We  next  have  two  grants  of  land  dated  in  6i6  and 
6i8  respectively,  professedly  made  to  Archbishop 
Laurence  by  y^dbald  or  Eadbald,son  of  yEthelberht. 
They  are  both  marked  as  spurious  by  Haddan  and 
Stubbs.^     I  have  discussed  them  in  the  text.* 

Passing  on  a  few  years  we  have  three  reputed 
letters  written  by  Pope  Honorius  to  Archbishop 
Honorius  of  Canterbury  and  to  yEdwin,  King  of 
Northumbria.  Of  these  again,  two  occur  in  Bede, 
and  will  be  discussed  later.  The  third  one  does  not 
occur  in  Bede,  but  is  found  among  the  notorious  series 
contained  in  William  of  Malmesbury,  and  was  clearly 
concocted  for  the  same  object — namely,  to  sustain 
Lanfranc  in  his  struCTcrle  to  secure  the  absolute 
supremacy  of  the  see  of  Canterbury.  Of  this  letter 
Haddan  and  Stubbs  say  :  "  This  is  the  third  of  the 
series  of  letters  in  William  of  Malmesbury.  This 
particular  letter  is  directly  at  variance  with  the 
certainly  genuine  letter  just  preceding  it,  written  by 
the  same  Pope  to  the  same  Archbishop,  at  probably 
the  same    date.     The    establishment  of  a   definite 

^  Op.  cit.  iii.  T})  ^r'd  74.  -  Bede,  ii.  191,  192. 

^  Op.  cit.  iii.  p.  69.  ■*  Infra^  235. 


Ixiv  INTRODUCTION 

order  between  Canterbury  and  York,  and  of  the 
downfall  of  the  latter,  of  which  Pope  Honorius  was 
certainly  ignorant  when  he  wrote  either  letter,  is 
no  doubt  the  most  natural  thing  in  the  world  for 
the  Pope  to  do  precisely  at  the  time  when  the  see 
of  York  had  come  into  being  by  the  previous 
success  of  Paulinus  ;  but  the  establishing  of  two 
inconsistent  arrangements  on  the  subject  at  the 
same  time  may  be  fairly  set  aside  as  impossible."^ 

We  will  now  pass  on  to  other  evidences. 

For  the  history  of  the  Popes  at  this  time,  which 
includes  some  dramatic  passages,  the  main  authority 
is  the  so-called  Liber  Pontificalis.  I  discussed  this 
work  in  the  introduction  to  my  previous  volume,  and 
took  my  place  alongside  of  my  master  Mommsen  in 
the  great  polemic  between  him  and  Duchesne  in 
regard  to  its  date.  I  am  more  than  ever  convinced 
that  Mommsen  is  substantially  right,  but  I  think  now 
that  we  may  fix  the  date  of  the  work  a  little  more 
closely.  I  agree  with  him  that  it  is  quite  incredible 
that  in  the  voluminous  works  of  Pope  Gregory  not 
a  reference  should  have  been  found  to  this  book  if 
it  had  really  then  existed.  I  know  of  no  actual 
reference  to  it  until  we  get  to  the  time  of  Bede, 
who  not  only  quotes  it  but  does  so  by  name. 
This  is  a  terviiims  ad  qtiem,  therefore.  On  the 
other  hand,  Mommsen  has  pointed  out  that  there 
is  a  passage  in  the  book  which  seems  taken  from 
a  work  of  Gregory.  This  would  be  a  ternmius 
a  quo.     The  date  of  the  book  would  therefore  come 

^  Haddan   and  Stubbs,  p.  86. 


INTRODUCTION  Ixv 

between  these  two  extreme  dates  rather  more 
than  a  century  apart.  There  is  another  passage 
in  the  Liber  which  has  been  apparently  over- 
looked, and  which  seems  to  me  to  give  us  another 
clue. 

In  the  account  of  Pope  Martin  i.,  when 
speaking  of  his  tomb  at  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore,  we 
read  :  "  Qui  et  7nulta  mirabilia  operatiLV  usque  in 
hodiernuni  diem"^  showing  that  this  part  of  the 
work  was  not  only  not  contemporary  with,  but  was 
written  a  considerable  time  after  Martin's  death.  I 
believe  the  work  was  not  compiled  at  all  until 
considerably  later  than  the  time  of  Martin.  It 
seems  to  me  that  the  Libe7'  Pontificalis  and  the 
Liber  Diurnus  are  complementary  to  each  other,  and 
were  written  about  the  same  time.  The  Liber 
Dizirnus  has  been  shown  to  have  been  very  prob- 
ably written  towards  the  end  of  the  seventh  century, 
and  it  is  to  the  same  period  I  would  assign  the 
compilation  of  the  Liber  Pontificalis.  It  seems, 
further,  very  likely  that  both  were  written  in  the 
time  of  Pope  Agatho,  about  whose  pontificate  there 
is  such  a  long  and  detailed  notice  in  the  Liber 
Pontificalis,  much  longer  than  that  of  any  Pope  who 
preceded  him  ;  the  only  other  life  which  approaches 
it  in  length  being  that  of  St.  Vigilius. 

I  cannot  deal  with  the  question  of  the  Popes' 
lives  and  careers  without  once  more  animadverting 
on  the  nature  of  the  work  now  being  published  on 
them  by  Father  Mann.      It  is  not  really  a  history, 

*  Op.  cit.  ed.  Mommsen,  p.  184. 


Ixvi  INTRODUCTION 

but  a  sustained  apologia  for  the  Popes'  faults 
and  the  Popes'  mistakes,  with  a  polemical  dis- 
ingenuousness  running  all  through  its  treatment 
of  the  authorities.  Its  theological  rancour  is  most 
distasteful  to  anyone  who  does  not  revel  in  the 
theories  of  Innocent  in.  and  his  inquisitors. 

For  the  history  of  Byzantium  at  this  time  I 
have  not  thought  it  necessary  for  my  purpose  (which 
is  only  to  supply  a  sketch  of  the  doings  there  as  a 
background  to  my  picture)  to  have  recourse  to  the 
orig-inal  authorities.  I  have  relied  in  rep"ard  to  it 
upon  the  truly  admirable  edition  of  Gibbon  of  my 
friend  Professor  Bury,  whose  new  notes  are  most 
illuminating  and  full  of  evidences  of  his  versatility 
and  manifold  learning,  and  upon  his  two  recent 
monographs  on  Byzantine  history.  For  the 
Merovingian  period  in  Gaul,  I  have  used  Gregory 
of  Tours,  and  have  also  had  constantly  by  me  the 
second  volume,  part  i,  of  the  most  recent  and  very 
excellent  history  of  France  edited  by  M.  Lavisse 
(Paris,  1903).  For  Spain,  and  especially  the  doings 
of  its  Church,  I  have  chiefly  used  L' Espagne 
Chr(^tienne,  by  Dom  H.  Leclercq  (2nd  ed.,  Paris, 
1906),  a  very  fair  and  learned  book.  For  the 
sagas  about  the  Anglian  slaves  I  have  used  the 
Whitby  monk's  very  crude  pamphlet  as  well  as 
Bede.  I  have  discussed  it  in  my  introduction  to 
the  previous  volume,  pp.  xlii-xliv,  and  have  nothing 
to  add  to  what  I  then  said.  We  will  now  turn  to 
Bede. 

In  using  Bede,   I    have   naturally  quoted   from 


INTRODUCTION  Ixvii 

Mr.  Plummer's  very  ideal  edition  of  his  historical 
works,  and  also  used  his  catena  of  notes  and  illus- 
trations, which  contain  the  results  of  great  and  wide 
reading  and  good  judgment,  and  are  most  illuminat- 
inof.  The  work  must  Iouq-  remain  the  fountain  to 
which  all  students  of  the  early  English  Church  will 
turn  as  the  authoritative  edition.  In  quoting  from 
the  first  volume,  which  contains  the  text,  I  have 
given  the  book  and  the  chapter  according  to  Bede's 
numeration ;  when  quoting  from  the  second  one, 
which  contains  the  notes,  I  have  given  the  volume 
and  page.  Besides  Mr.  Plummer's  work,  I  have  also 
had  Smith's  edition  by  me.  The  latter  will  always 
remain  a  fine  monument  of  English  scholarship  in 
days  when  scientific  editions  were  scarce.  Its 
appendices  contain  discussions  on  various  points 
and  difficulties,  several  of  which  are  still  useful 
and  contain  much  out-of-the-way  learning.  There 
is  another  edition  of  Bede  which  is  most  useful, 
not  only  because  its  author  was  a  very  good  Latin 
scholar,  but  also  because  its  introduction  and  notes 
are  full  of  learning.  I  refer  to  the  Rev.  Joseph 
Stevenson's  translation  of  Bede's  Ecclesiastical 
History  and  minor  works  in  vol.  i.  part  2  of  the 
Church  Historians  of  England. 

Bede  has  in  his  preface  gone  into  the  question  of 
his  authorities.  I  will  borrow  Mr.  Stevenson's  excel- 
lent version  of  that  part  of  this  preface  which  deals 
with  his  sources  for  the  period  dealt  with  in  his  great 
work  specially  used  in  this  volume.  He  says  :  "  To 
the  end  that  I  may  remove  both  from  yourself  and 


Ixviii  INTRODUCTION 

other  readers  or  hearers  of  this  history  all  occasion 
of  doubting  as  to  what  I  have  written,  I  will  take 
care  briefly  to  intimate  from  what  authors  I  chiefly 
learned  the  same. 

"My  principal  authority  and  assistant  in  this  work 
{auctor  ante  omnes  atqiie  adjutor  optisculi  hujus) 
was  the  most  learned  and  revered  Abbot  Albinus 
(he  was  Abbot  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  at 
Canterbury),  who,  educated  in  the  Church  of 
Canterbury  by  those  most  venerable  and  learned 
men,  Archbishop  Theodore  of  blessed  memory  and 
the  Abbot  Adrian,  carefully  transmitted  to  me  by 
Nothelm  (afterwards  Archbishop  of  Canterbury), 
the  pious  priest  {I'eligiosuin  presbytei'tmi)  of  the 
Church  of  London,  either  in  writing  or  by  word  of 
mouth  of  the  same  Nothelm,  all  that  he  thought 
worthy  of  memory  that  had  been  done  in  the 
province  of  Kent,  or  in  the  adjacent  parts,  by  the 
disciples  of  the  blessed  Pope  Gregory,  as  he  had 
learnt  the  same  either  from  written  records  or  the 
traditions  of  his  ancestors.  The  same  Nothelm 
afterwards  going  to  Rome,  having,  with  the  leave  of 
Pope  Gregory,  who  now  presides  over  that  Church 
{i.e.  Gregory  ii.),  searched  into  the  archives  of  the 
Holy  Roman  See,  found  there  some  epistles  of  the 
blessed  Pope  Gregory  and  other  popes ;  and 
returning  home,  by  the  advice  of  the  aforesaid 
most  reverend  Father  Albinus,  brought  them  to 
me,  to  be  inserted  in  my  history.  Thus  from  the 
beginning  of  this  volume  to  the  time  when  the 
English  nation  received  the  faith  of  Christ  we  have 


INTRODUCTION  Ixix 

learnt  what  we  have  stated  from  the  writings  of  our 
predecessors,  and  from  them  gathered  matter  for 
our  history  ;  but  from  that  time  till  the  present, 
what  was  transacted  in  the  Church  of  Canterbury, 
by  the  disciples  of  Christ  or  their  successors,  and 
under  what  kings  the  same  happened,  has  been 
conveyed  to  us  by  Nothelm,  through  the  care  of 
the  said  Abbot  Albinus.  They  also  partly  informed 
me  by  what  bishops  and  under  what  kings  the 
provinces  of  the  East  and  West  Saxons,  as  also  of 
the  East  Angles  and  of  the  Northumbrians,  received 
the  faith  of  Christ.  In  short,  I  was  chiefly  en- 
couraged in  venturing  to  undertake  this  work  by 
the  persuasions  of  the  same  Albinus.  .  .  .  But 
what  was  done  in  the  Church  throughout  the 
different  districts  of  the  Northumbrians,  from  the 
time  when  they  received  the  faith  of  Christ  till  this 
present,  I  received  not  from  any  one  particular 
author,  but  by  the  faithful  testimony  of  innumerable 
witnesses,  who  might  well  know  or  remember  the 
same ;  in  addition  to  what  I  had  of  my  own 
knowledge."  ^ 

It  was  to  Albinus,  above  named,  that  Bede 
wrote  a  letter  which  is  affixed  to  his  Ecclesiastical 
History.  The  last  phrases  of  the  dedication  are  worth 
recording  here  for  their  tender  thought :  "  Teque 
amantissime  pater,  supplex  odsecro,  ut  pro  Tizea 
fragilitate  ctLm  his  qui  tecinn  suitt  fanmlis  Christi 
apud piuvi  Judiceni  sedulus  intercedere  me^nineris ; 

^  Op.  cit.  ed.  Stevenson,  vol.  i.  part  ii.  pp.  306  and  307.     I  have 
inserted  the  Latin  words  here  as  elsewhere  when  the  sense  was  the 
least  ambiguous. 
/ 


Ixx  INTRODUCTION 

sed  et  eos,  ad  quos  eadem  nostra  opuscula  pervenire 
feceris,  hoc  idem  facei^e  moniieris.  Bene  vale,  semper 
amantissime  in  Christo  pater  optime.'' 

The  various  documents  quoted  by  Bede  in  re- 
ofard  to  the  mission  of  Auo-ustus  have  been  for  the 
most  part  accepted  without  dispute,  except  the 
one  containing  the  questions  of  Augustine  and 
the  responsions  of  the  Pope  above  named.  Mr. 
Plummer  has  shown  the  great  probability  that  the 
letter  of  Boniface  to  Archbishop  Justus  has  been 
put  together  from  two  separate  letters  by  conflation, 
and  that  otherwise  it  is  a  genuine  document/ 

In  regard  to  the  letters  quoted  by  Bede  as 
having  been  written  by  Pope  Boniface  v.  to 
y^dwin  and  yEthelberga  of  Northumbria,  there 
is  a  considerable  difficulty.  There  is  no  reference 
in  them  to  any  ecclesiastic,  whether  a  bishop  or 
otherwise,  and  it  is  especially  noteworthy  that 
Paulinus  should  not  be  named  in  them.  The 
letters  have  previously  aroused  comment.  Thus 
Stevenson  says  :  "  As  Pope  Boniface  v.  was  buried 
25th  October  625,  this  letter  [i.e.  the  letter  to  ^Edwin) 
must  have  been  written  before  that  date.  There  is, 
therefore,  some  little  inaccuracy  in  the  order  of  Bede's 
narrative  at  this  point,  since  he  places  this  letter 
after  events  which  occurred  in  the  previous  year."^ 

Again,  Bede  tells  us  Paulinus  was  consecrated 
Bishop  by  Justus  on  the  21st  of  January  625,  and 
yEdwin  was  probably  married  in  June  of  the  same 
year.     On  the  20th  of  April  626  yEdwin's  daughter 

1  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  92  and  93.  -  Op.  cit,  p.  371,  note  i. 


INTRODUCTION  Ixxi 

was  born.  ^dwin  was  baptized  on  the  8th  of 
June  626,  Now  the  two  letters  to  ^dwin  and 
^thelberga  are  expressly  stated  in  their  text  to  have 
been  sent  by  Boniface,  who  died  on  22nd  October 
625 — that  is,  many  months  before  yEd win's  con- 
version, and  when  there  was  no  reason  to  think 
he  would  be  converted,  and  only  four  months  after 
the  probable  date  of  his  marriage.  Boniface  never- 
theless addresses  the  latter  as  Vir  gloriosus.  He 
styles  JpA\\Q\hergd.  gloriosa  JiHa  ^delberga,  and  also 
refers  to  the  King  of  Kent  2<.s  gloriosus  filiiis  noster 
AudiLbaldus. 

Again,  Boniface  in  his  letter  to  yEthelberga  says 
that  he  had  heard  with  grief  that  yEdwin  up  to  that 
time  had  delayed  to  listen  to  the  preachers,  and  this 
suggests  a  difficulty,  in  that  -^thelberga  could  not 
have  reached  York  until  the  end  of  July,  and  the 
tidings  of  yEdwin's  delays  could  hardly  have  reached 
Rome  before  the  end  of  October,  when  Boniface 
was  dead.  Could  "  Boniface,"  says  Bright,  "  in  the 
address,  be  a  scribe's  error  for  Honorius  ?  "  ^  To 
this  explanation  Mr.  Plummer,  who  does  not  deny 
the  difficulty,  replies  that  in  the  letter  he  speaks 
of  himself  as  the  Pope  who  had  received  the  news 
of  ^dbald's  conversion.  "  This  might  be  Boni- 
face v.,  who  succeeded  in  619,  but  could  hardly 
be  Honorius."  ^ 

It  would  seem,  in  fact,  that  there  is  no  escape 
from  the  position  except  by  treating  the  letters  as 
spurious,  which  is  confirmed  by   the  very  strange 

^  Bright,  1 30,  note  6.  ^  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  97. 


Ixxii  INTRODUCTION 

language  attributed  to  the  Pope  when  addressing 
the  Queen  about  her  husband.  This  view  is 
strengthened  when  we  turn  to  the  letter  supposed 
to  have  been  sent  by  Pope  Honorius,  the  successor 
of  Boniface,  to  i^dwin.  It  is  addressed  to  his 
most  excellent  and  eminent  son  ^dwin,  King  of 
the  Angles  (excellentisswto  atque  pj^aecellentissinio), 
and  claims  to  be  an  answer  to  a  letter  from  the 
King  asking  for  certain  favours,  and  telling  him 
he  had  sent  the  palls  of  the  two  metropolitans 
(meaning,  apparently,  he  had  sent  them  to  y^dwin). 
This  letter  is  not  dated,  nor  is  it  quite  easy  to 
find  a  date  for  it,  nor  is  it  contained  in  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  version  of  Bede,  nor  again  is  its  phraseology 
very  comfortable.  Nor  can  we  understand  how 
the  Pope  comes  to  speak  of  Edwin's  requests  on 
behalf  of  his  own  bishops,  pi^o  vestris  sacerdotibus 
ordinanda  sperastis.  ^dwin  only  had  one  bishop, 
— namely,  Paulinus, — and  there  was  only  one  other 
bishop  in  England  at  the  time — namely,  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  who  it  is  difficult  to  under- 
stand could  have  been  in  any  way  ^Edwin's  bishop. 
The  paragraph  about  the  palls,  too,  seems  to  me 
very  suspicious.  Why  should  he  mention  the  two 
palls  when  writing  to  the  King  ?  This  becomes  still 
more  strange  when  we  find  him  at  the  same  time 
writing  to  Archbishop  Honorius,  then  primate  of 
all  England,  and  sending  him  a  pall,  but  not 
saying  a  word  about  his  having  sent  one  to 
Paulinus,  and  thus  cutting  his  archdiocese  in  two 
and  giving  one  half  of  it  to  another  without  giving 


INTRODUCTION  Ixxiii 

him  any  notice.     The  very  fact  of  sending  two  palls 
at  one  time  is  in  itself  suspicious.     So  is  the  reason 
he  gives  for  it — not  in  order  to  constitute  a  new 
metropolitan,  but  "to  the  intent  that  when  either  of 
them  (he  styles  both  of  them  metropolitans)  shall  be 
called  out  of  this  world  to  his  Creator,  the  other  may 
by  this  authority  of  ours  substitute  another  bishop  in 
his  place."     The  deputing  of  the  power  by  a  Pope 
of  conferring  the  dignity  of  a  metropolitan  upon  any 
one  at  this  time  would  be  most  unprecedented  and 
unlikely.     A  further  sign  of  falsity  is  the  amusing 
suggestion  of  the  Pope  that  the  recently  converted 
King  should  spend  his  days  in  reading  the  works  of 
St.    Gregory  {''  Praedicatoris  igitur  vestri  domini 
77iei  apostolicae  niemo7'iae  Gregorii  frequenter  lectione 
occupaii"),  when    it    is    quite  certain    he  knew  no 
language  save   his  own   Northumbrian  speech.      I 
confess  that  this  Northumbrian  letter,   which  con- 
sists  almost    entirely    of   pious    rhetoric,    like    the 
Northumbrian  letters  attributed  to  Pope  Boniface  v., 
has  all    the    signs    of   being  a  forgery,  and    it    is 
curious  to  me  that  the  suo'o-estion  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  made  before.     These  letters  seem  to  me 
to  have  been  concocted  in  order  to  establish  a  claim 
for  the  Northern  province  to  have  a  metropolitan 
of    its    own.     The    sophistication    may    well    have 
been  the  handiwork  of  Paulinus,  and  the  statement 
that  he  left  his  pall  to  Rochester,  as  stated  by  Bede, 
has  the  appearance  of  having  been  inserted  to  give 
further  colour  to  the  claim.     Anyhow,  the  internal 
evidence  of  the  letters  entirely  condemns  them. 


Ixxiv  INTRODUCTION 

This  completes  our  survey  of  the  letters  and 
similar  compositions  quoted  by  Bede.  There  is 
still  another  document  which  he  uses.  Speaking  of 
King  i^thelberht,  he  says  that  amongst  the  benefits 
which  his  thoughtfulness  conferred  on  his  people 
{qiiaegenti  suae  conszilendo  conferebat)  he  drew  up  for 
them,  in  concert  with  his  Witenagemot  {cum  consilio 
sapieittium),  judicial  decisions  {decreta  illi  judici- 
oriwi)  after  the  manner  of  the  Romans,  which  were 
written  in  the  Anglian  language  and  were  extant 
in  his  day  and  remained  in  force  among  the 
people.  The  first  thing  laid  down  in  this  code 
is  the  penalty  to  be  paid  by  any  who  steals  any- 
thing belonging  to  the  Church,  to  the  bishop,  or 
the  other  orders.  He  evidently,  said  Bede,  wished 
to  give  protection  to  those  whom  he  had  welcomed 
together  with  their  doctrine  {volens  scilicet  tui- 
tionem  eis,  quos  et  quorum  doctrinam  stisceperat, 
praestare -y^  in  the  A.-S.  version,  i)a  nu  gena  o\> 
dir  mid  him  haefde  and  gehaldene  synd).  These 
dooms,  as  they  were  called,  are  supposed  to  be 
still  extant,  being  preserved  for  us  in  the  common 
place-book  of  Bishop  Ernulf  (i  114-24),  known  as 
the  Textus  Roffensis.  The  dooms  in  question  have 
been  thought  to  be  rather  an  epitome  than  the  full 
code,  and  they  may  well  have  been  written  down 
later  than  ^thelberht's  reign,  and  seem  to  reflect  a 
time  when  the  status  of  the  Church  was  better 
established  than  in  his  day.  The  position  given  to 
Churchmen  when  compared  with  that  of  laymen,  as 

*  Bede,  book  li.  5. 


INTRODUCTION  Ixxv 

measured  by  their  treatment  by  these  laws,  is  a  too 
attractive  one  for  so  early  a  period.^ 

In  writing-  the  following-  pages  I  have,  in  addition 
to  the  materials  supplied  by  Bede,  ransacked  the 
lives  of  the  various  persons  who  come  within  the 
limits  of  my  subject  and  which  are  contained  in 
the  Acta  Sanctorum.  The  matter  of  any  value  in 
these  lives  not  in  Bede  is  very  slight,  and  consists 
first  of  incidents  and  stories  with  local  colour  and 
depicting  the  thought  of  the  times  in  a  picturesque 
and  useful  way  which  are  scattered  through  the,  for 
the  most  part,  very  otiose  and  jejune  notices  of 
miracles ;  and  secondly,  of  accounts  of  the  transla- 
tions of  the  bodies  of  the  saintly  men.  The  authors 
of  most  of  these  lives  were  very  late.  Not  one  at 
this  period  is  contemporary  ;  and  the  best  of  them, 
for  the  picturesque  details  he  gives,  was  Gocelin.  I 
have  also  freely  used  the  account  of  the  history  of 
the    Abbey    of   St.    Augustine    written  (as   was,   I 

^  The  late  Sir  F.  Palgrave,  a  very  sane  critic  of  early  history, 
writes  thus  of  these  dooms  :  "They  now  exist  in  a  single  manuscript  ; 
the  volume  compiled  by  Ernulphus,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  and  the 
opening  paragraph  or  section,  containing  the  penalties  imposed  upon 
offenders  against  the  peace  of  the  Church  and  clergy,  seems  to  corre- 
spond in  tenor  with  the  recital  given  by  Bede.  But  it  is  difficult  to 
believe  that  the  text  of  an  Anglo-Norman  manuscript  of  the  twelfth 
century  exhibits  an  unaltered  specimen  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  of  the 
time  of  Ethelbert.  The  language  has  evidently  been  modernised 
and  corrupted  by  successive  transcriptions.  Some  passages  are 
quite  unintelligible,  and  the  boldest  critic  would  hardly  venture  upon 
conjectural  emendations,  for  which  he  can  obtain  no  collateral  aid. 
Neither  is  there  any  proof  whatever  of  the  integrity  of  the  text.  It 
cannot  be  asserted,  with  any  degree  of  confidence,  that  we  have  the 
whole  of  the  law.  Destitute  of  any  statutory  clause  or  enactment,  it 
is  from  the  title  or  rubric  alone  that  we  learn  the  name  of  the  Legis- 
lator" (Palgrave,  English  Commomvealih^  i.  44  and  45). 


Ixxvi  INTRODUCTION 

think,  proved  by  its  editor,  Hardwick)  by  Thomas 
of  Elmham,  a  monk  of  the  abbey,  who  was  its 
treasurer  in  1407.  Thomas  subsequently  became 
prior  of  Lenton,  in  Northamptonshire,  was  ap- 
pointed vicar-general  to  Raymund,  Abbot  of  Clugny 
for  the  kingdoms  of  England  and  Scotland  in  141 6, 
and  in  1426  commissary-general  in  spirituals  and 
temporals  for  all  vacant  benefices  belonging  to 
the  Cluniac  order  in  England,  Scotland,  and 
Ireland.^ 

His  work  on  St.  Augustine's  Abbey  was  planned 
on  a  great  scale,  and  only  a  fragment  dealing  with 
the  first  two  hundred  years  was  completed.  In 
this  he  incorporates  the  material  published  by  his 
predecessors  Sprott  and  Thorn,  annalists  of  the 
abbey,  which  are  very  scanty  for  the  period  in 
question.  He  has  given  copies  of  all  the  charters 
existing  at  St.  Augustine's  when  he  wrote,  and 
which  unfortunately,  as  we  have  seen,  were  nearly 
all  forgeries.  He  also  gives  some  notices  of  the 
successive  abbots  of  the  same  abbey,  which  add 
very  little  to  Bede's  account.  He  supplies  us  with 
a  certain  number  of  epitaphs,  which  may  in  some 
cases  have  been  composed  long  after  the  deaths  of 
the  persons  commemorated,  and  he  has  preserved  a 
very  interesting  account  of  the  books,  ecclesiastical 
furniture,  and  relics  which,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
tenants  of  the  monastery  when  he  wrote,  and  no 
doubt  for  many  centuries  before,  were  associated 
with  Augustine  and  his  mission.     This  information 

^  Op.  cit.  ed.  Hardwick,  xxii-xxiv. 


INTRODUCTION  Ixxvii 

I  have  incorporated  and  criticised.  What  strikes 
one  in  reading  his  pages  is  how  very  Httle,  if  any, 
more  knowledge  about  the  mission  was  possessed 
by  the  monks  of  St.  Augustine  in  the  time  of 
Sprott,  Thorne,  and  Elmham  than  that  contained 
in  Bede's  immortal  work. 

It  may  be  noted  by  my  readers  that  there  is 
hardly  a  reference  in  the  following  book  to  what  was 
made  a  fetish  by  Mr.  Freeman  and  his  scholars — 
namely,  the  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle.  This  is  be- 
cause, in  the  period  we  are  dealing  with,  I  look  upon 
it  as  a  worthless  authority.  We  now  know  it  to  be 
a  compilation  of  the  end  of  the  ninth  or  beginning 
of  the  tenth  century.  So  far  as  I  know,  it  does  not 
contain  a  single  reliable  fact  or  date  about  St. 
Augustine  and  his  mission  which  is  not  derived 
from   Bede. 

Leaving-  the  original  authorities  and  turnino;  to 
later  ones  who  have  used  and  discussed  them  in 
their  works,  I  shall  limit  my  notice  to  those  I  have 
alone  found  helpful — namely,  writers  in  whose  works 
new  or  fruitful  ideas  occur — and  shall  neglect  those 
conventional  authors  who  have  simply  followed  other 
conventional  ones. 

Among  the  former  I  must  put  in  the  front  rank 
two  historians  who  have  done  a  great  deal  to  illumin- 
ate the  portion  of  English  Church  history  dealt  with 
in  the  following  pages.  I  mean  Professor  Bright  and 
Bishop  Browne  of  Bristol,  whom  I  have  coupled  in 
the  dedication  to  this  volume.  The  former  modestly 
entitled  his  work  Chapters  of  Early  English  Church 


Ixxviii  INTRODUCTION 

History.  It  has  gone  through  several  editions.  I 
quote  from  the  third.  There  is  not  a  page  in  it  which 
is  not  full  of  learned  research,  ingenious  suggestion, 
and  sound  induction,  which  have  greatly  helped 
me.  My  old  friend  Bishop  Browne  still  remains 
among  us.  He  has  filled  the  roles  of  professor, 
don,  bishop,  and  historian  with  the  same  indomit- 
able vigour  and  energy,  and  has  found  time  to  do 
many  things.  His  lectures  on  the  early  crosses 
and  sculptured  stones  of  Britain  did  much  to  put 
the  subject  on  a  scientific  basis. 

Among  the  works  he  has  written,  those  which  I 
have  chiefly  used  here  have  been  two  published 
by  the  S.P.C.K. — namely,  Aitgustine  and  his 
Companions,  and  The  Conversion  of  the  Heptarchy, 
in  both  of  which  his  local  and  archseolosfical  know- 
ledge  and  his  keen  insight  have  greatly  helped  him 
and  me. 

A  third  work  of  the  same  utility  and  high  level 
was  prepared  by  Canon  Mason  for  the  millennium 
of  St.  Augustine.  It  contains  excellent  and 
scholarly  translations  of  the  documents  relating  to 
the  latter's  mission,  printed  in  juxtaposition  with 
the  Latin  texts,  and  with  useful  notes  and  also 
four  dissertations  full  of  suggestiveness  and  value. 
The  first  one  is  written  by  my  most  industrious  and 
many-sided  friend  Professor  Oman,  and  discusses 
the  political  outlook  in  Europe  in  the  year  597  at 
the  time  of  the  mission.  The  second,  by  the 
Editor,  refers  to  the  mission  of  Augustine  and  his 
companions  in   relation   to  other   agencies    in    the 


INTRODUCTION  Ixxix 

conversion  of  England.  The  third  is  by  one  of  my 
oldest  friends,  also  a  many-sided  person  trained 
in  a  science  which  demands  a  picturesque  eye  for 
scenery  and  geology,  Professor  M'Kenna  Hughes 
of  Cambridge.  It  deals  with  the  puzzling  question 
of  the  landing-place  of  Augustine.  The  fourth  is 
by  the  Rev.  H.  A.  Wilson  (a  most  competent 
authority).  It  discusses  some  liturgical  questions 
relating-  to  the  mission  of  St.  Auq-ustine. 

To  these  helps  I  must  add  the  lives  in 
the  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography,  of  which 
that  of  Augustine  is  by  the  Rev.  G.  F.  Maclear, 
D.D.,  the  author  of  a  work  published  by  the 
S.P.C.K.  on  the  Conversion  of  the  West,  etc. 
Those  of  Archbishops  Laurence,  Mellitus,  Justus 
and  Honorius ;  of  Romanus  and  Damian  Bishops  of 
Rochester,  andofThomasandBerhtgils(or  Boniface), 
Bishops  of  East  Anglia,  are  by  the  master-hand 
of  Bishop  Stubbs  ;  while  Archbishop  Deusdedit's  is 
by  the  Rev.  C.  Hole.  That  of  Paulinus  of  York 
is  by  a  most  competent  scholar  and  authority  on 
the  history  of  the  Diocese  of  York,  Canon  Raine. 
Other  lives  in  this  fine  work  containing  up-to-date 
information  are  those  of  ^thelberht,  King  of 
Kent,  and  his  son.  King  yEdbald,  by  Professor 
Bright,  already  eulogised  ;  yEthelfred  and  ^dwin. 
Kings  of  Northumbria,  by  Canon  Raine  ;  Queen 
Bertha,  wife  of  ^thelberht,  and  y^thelberga,  wife  of 
i^dwin,  by  Bishop  Stubbs.  Bishop  Stubbs  was  also 
responsible  for  the  lives  of  Penda,  King  of  Mercia, 
Redwald,  King  of  East  Anglia,  and  Sabercht,  King 


Ixxx  INTRODUCTION  ^ 

of  the  East  Saxons.  I  have  given  these  names 
because  it  would  be  difficult  to  match  a  more  com- 
petent body  of  biographers  to  deal  with  the  lives. 

It  is  a  practice  which  I  deprecate  to  sink  the 
authors  of  such  monographs  in  the  name  of  the 
great  work  in  which  their  contributions  are  con- 
tained,  and  thus  not  only  to  do  them  an  injustice, 
but  to  depreciate  the  value  of  the  borrowed  matter, 
if  any. 

Turning  from  the  actual  biographies  to  other 
matters  discussed  in  the  following  pages.  First 
is  the  account  to  be  found  here  of  the  English 
ecclesiastical  architectural  remains  still  existing, 
which  date  from  this  early  period  and  which  I 
have  tried  to  make  fairly  complete.  In  regard 
to  them  I  have  had  the  help  of  four  friends,  one 
unfortunately  dead,  who  have  done  much  to  revolu- 
tionise the  history  of  early  architecture  in  this 
country  and  to  put  it  on  a  scientific  basis.  On 
this  subject  those  who  write  with  the  greatest 
authority  must  always  place  in  the  first  rank  our 
"  Father  Anchises "  Micklethwaite,  the  architect 
in  charge  of  Westminster  Abbey,  who  was  the 
first  to  teach  the  great  lesson  which  Mr.  Freeman 
was  so  loath  to  learn- — that  the  plan  of  a  church 
is  the  first  element  in  its  analysis  ;  that  its  history 
must  be  found  in  the  inside  rather  than  the  outside 
of  the  building  ;  and  that  some  technical  knowledge 
of  the  craft  of  the  builder  as  well  as  of  the  architect 
is  necessary  to  anyone  who  professes  to  describe  a 
building.      He    swept   away  many  foolish    legends 


INTRODUCTION  Ixxxi 

with  his  berserker's  vigorous  arm,  and  he  was  the 
founder  of  the  scientific  treatment  of  Anoflo-Saxon 
architectural  remains.  The  result  of  some  of  his 
work  in  that  behalf  will  be  found  condensed  in  the 
following  pages.  Those  who  followed  him  the  other 
day  to  his  fitting  home  in  the  picturesque  cloisters  of 
Westminster  Abbey,  where  his  requiem  was  sung  by 
the  choir-boys  he  loved  so  well,  lost  a  kind,  pictur- 
esque, masculine-minded  friend  ;  and  one  of  his 
pupils  in  this  inquiry  must  be  allowed  to  write  with 
a  little  emotion  on  an  occasion  when  he  is  appor- 
tioning his  various  obligations. 

With  him  I  must  mention  three  of  his  ac- 
complished pupils  who  have  all  illuminated  the 
subject  of  early  Anglo-Saxon  architecture,  all  valued 
friends  of  mine  and  gifted  with  acute  insight  and 
knowledge — St.  John  Hope,  C.  Peers,  and  Baldwin 
Brown.  I  have  freely  used  and  quoted  their 
writings. 

In  regard  to  matters  of  early  ritual,  I  have 
depended  on  the  master  work  of  Duchesne.  In 
discussing  the  question  of  the  library  of  books 
which  Thomas  of  Elmham  associates  with  St. 
Augustine's  name,  and  claims  that  he  and  his 
companions  brought  them  to  England,  I  have 
followed  in  the  footsteps  of  a  not  sufficiently 
appreciated  authority,  the  late  Professor  Westwood, 
and  of  an  acknowledged  living  master,  Dr.  James  of 
King's  College,  Cambridge. 

I  am  under  obligations  to  all  these  scholars 
and    students,  and    to    others   from   whom    I   have 


Ixxxii  INTRODUCTION 

learned    occasional   facts.      I    take   off  my    hat    to 
them  all.     Their  work  has  made  mine  possible. 

I  may  be  forgiven  for  including  in  my  gratitude 
my  patient  wife,  who  has  made  my  life  so  bright ; 
my  good  sons,  who  have  helped  me  by  their 
advice,  as  well  as  in  other  more  onerous  ways  ; 
my  kind  friend  the  publisher  ;  his  delightful  son, 
John  Murray,  jun.,  the  heir  to  many  genera- 
tions of  "John"  Murrays,  who  has  read  through 
my  proofs,  and  the  other  members  of  the  ever-patient 
staff  in  Albemarle  Street.  Lastly,  the  printer,  the 
reader,  the  compiler  of  the  excellent  indices  to  this 
and  my  previous  volume,  and  the  skilful  persons 
who  made  my  maps  and  plates.  May  we  all  meet 
again  in  Walhalla. 

HENRY  H.  HOWORTH. 


THE  EMPERORS,  POPES,  AND  THE  KINGS  OF 
THE  FRANKS  AND  VISIGOTHS, 

FROM    595    TO   664 


Emperors  of 

Popes  of 

Kings  of  the  Franks. 

Kings  of  the 

Byzantium. 

Rome. 

Visigoths. 

59S 

13th  year  of 

5th  year  of 

2ist  year  of  Childebert, 

9th     year     of 

Maurice. 

Gregory. 

King  of  Austrasia  and 

Reccared. 

Departure  of 

Burgundy,     and     the 

Augustine 

irth  of  Chlothaire  11., 

from  Rome. 

King  of  Neustria. 

596 

*' 

'* 

Theodeljert,      King      of 
Austrasia. 

Theodoric,  King  of  Bur- 
gundy. 

■■ 

597 

„ 

„ 

,, 

598 

„ 

,, 

,, 

599 

,, 

,, 

,, 

,, 

600 

II 

II 

II 

II 

601 

Liuva  II. 

602 

Phocas. 

II 

II 

603 

,, 

II 

Witteric. 

604 

II 

Sabinianus. 

II 

II 

605 

,, 

1, 

,, 

,, 

606 

II 

Boniface  11 1.  (?) 

II 

II 

607 

Boniface  iv. 

II 

608 

11 

II 

609 

,, 

,, 

„ 

,, 

610 

Heraclius. 

,, 

,, 

Gondemar. 

611 

" 

II 

II 

II 

612 

Theodoric     unites    Aus- 
trasia to  Burgundy.^ 

Sisebut. 

613 

Chlothaire  11.,  sole  King 

1, 

6i4 

of  the  Franks. 

615 

Deusdedit. 

II 

6i6 

II 

617 

,, 

,, 

II 

618 

II 

Boniface  v 

,1 

II 

619 

,, 

„ 

„ 

,, 

620 

,1 

,1 

,, 

,, 

621 

II 

II 

,1 

II 

622 

,1 

II 

Dagobert    i.,    King    of 

Reccared  11. 

623 

II 

11 

Austrasia. 

and  Suinthiia. 

624 

11 

II 

,1 

,, 

625 

„ 

Honorius  I. 

II 

,1 

626 

II 

11 

11 

II 

627 

II 

II 

II 

II 

628 

,1 

II 

Death  of  Chlothaire  11. 

II 

629 

,1 

1, 

Dagobert  sole  King. 

II 

630 

1, 

1, 

,, 

631 

,1 

II 

II 

Sisenand. 

631 

„ 

,1 

Sigebert,     sub-King     of 

1, 

633 

,, 

,, 

Austrasia. 

)i 

634 

,, 

,, 

,, 

635 

„ 

,, 

,, 

,, 

636 

,1 

,1 

,, 

Chintila. 

637 

II 

Severinus. 

Death  'of   Dagobert   i.  ; 

II 

638 

„ 

II 

Chlovis  II. succeeds  him 

II 

639 

" 

>• 

in  Neustria  and  Sige- 
bert in  Austrasia. 

" 

640 

John  IV. 

■• 

Tulga. 

Ixxxiii 


THE  EMPERORS,  POPES,  AND  THE  KINGS  OF  THE  FRANKS 
AND  VISIGOTHS— coKiimied 


Emperors 

Popes  ok 
Rome. 

Kings  of  the  Franks. 

Kings  of  the 

OF  Constanti- 

Visigoths. 

nople. 

641 

Constantine  in. 
Constantine  iv. 
Constans  11. 

John  iv. 

Chlovis     II.,     King     of 
Neustria  ;       Sigebert, 
King  of  Austrasia. 

Tulga. 

642 

Theodore. 

Chindesvvintha. 

643 

„ 

» 

644 

,, 

II 

645 

,, 

>i 

646 

,, 

» 

647 
648 

649 

'• 

" 

Martin  i. 

Recceswintha, 

650 

651 

652 

;; 

as  see  iated 
with      his 

father. 

6i;^ 

Recceswintha 

654 

Eugenius  iv. 

sole  King. 

655 
656 

" 

On  Sigebert's  death,  his 

" 

brother,     Chlovis     11., 

• 

reunited      the     Frank 
Kingdom     and      died 
the  same  year. 
Chlothaire    ill.,    son    of 

657 

Vitalian. 

Chlovis  11. 

,, 

658 

„ 

„ 

,, 

659 

,, 

,, 

,) 

660 

jj 

,, 

,, 

66 1 

J, 

Childeric       11.       elected 

jj 

662 

„ 

King  of  Austrasia  his 

,, 

663 

jj 

brother,       Chlothaire, 

,, 

664  1 

,, 

only  retaining    Neus- 

,, 

tria. 

^  End  of  the  mission  of  St.  Augustine. 

GENEALOGY  OF  THE  DESCENDANTS  OF 
CHLOTHAIRE  IL 


GOMATRUDIS. 


Chlothaire  11., 
t628. 
I 
Dagobert  I.,  t  638. 

I      I 


Nantechildis. 

I 


Sigebert,  t  656, 
King  of  Austrasia. 


Chlovis  ii.,  t  656, 
King  of  Neustria 
and  Burgundy. 
On  his  brother's 
death  re-united  the 
Kingdom  of  the 
Franks  and  soon 
after  died. 


St.  Baldechildis 

(or  Bathildis), 

a  Breton. 


Chlothaire  mi., 
sole  King  of  the 
Franks,  656-661. 
When  he  was  de- 
prived of  Austrasia, 
he  retained  Neustria. 


Childeric  ii., 
elected  King  of 
Austrasia,  661. 


Theodore  hi. 


Ixxxiv 


THE  ENGLISH  ARCHBISHOPS  AND  BISHOPS,  AND 
THE  ABBOTS  OF  ST.  AUGUSTINE'S, 

FROM    597   TO   664 


Abbots  of  SS. 

Archbishops  of 

Peter  and  Paul 

Bishops  of 

Bishop  of  London, 

Canterbury. 

{i.e.  ov  St. 
Augustine's). 

Rochester. 

ETC.    ETC. 

597 

Augustine  landed 

598 

in  England. 

Petrus. 

599 

„ 

,, 

600 

II 

11 

601 

602 

11 

II 

603 

Augustine  re- 

II 

604 

ceived  the  Pall. 

11 

Justus. 

Mell 

tu^. 

60s 

Laurentius. 

1, 

II 

606 

II 

II 

II 

607 

,, 

Johannes. 

II 

608 

II 

1, 

II 

609 

II 

11 

,, 

610 

II 

II 

II 

611 

II 

612 

II 

II 

6,3 

II 

11 

II 

614 

II 

,, 

I, 

615 

„ 

„ 

II 

616 

1, 

II 

617 

„ 

,1 

,1 

Mellitus    expelled,   and 

618 

II 

Rufinianus. 

II 

London    reverted    to 

619 

Mellitus. 

„ 

„ 

paganism. 

620 
621 
622 
623 

>> 

>> 

» 

" 

" 

" 

Bishop  of  York. 

624 

Justus. 

,, 

Romanus. 

625 

„ 

1, 

II 

Paul 

nus. 

626 

,1 

Gratiosus. 

627 

„ 

1, 

,, 

* 

628 

I, 

II 

II 

629 

,, 

„ 

,1 

' 

630 

,, 

„ 

11 

1 

631 

,, 

,, 

1, 

632 

11 

,1 

633 

,, 

,1 

1, 

Paulinus   abandons   his 

634 

11 

1, 

see. 

63s 
636 

Honorius. 

'. 

637 

„ 

„ 

circ,   637  Rom- 

Bishops of 

638 

1, 

Death  of  Grati- 
osus, followed 

anus  drowned. 
Paulinus     (late 

DUNWICH. 

639 

,, 

Bishop     of 

by  a  vacancy 

York). 

631 

Felix. 

of  two  years. 

II 

632 

640 

,, 

Petronius. 

II 

633 

641 

,1 

II 

634 

642 

„ 

,, 

11 

635 

643 

„ 

,, 

1, 

636 

644 

„ 

„ 

Ithamar. 

637 

64s 

„ 

,, 

,1 

638 

646 

" 

" 

" 

639 
640 

g 


THE  ENGLISH  ARCHBISHOPS  AND  BISHOPS,  AND  THE 
ABBOTS  OF  ST.  AUGUSTINE'S— coniimied 


Abbots  of  SS. 

Archbishops  of 

Peter  and  Paul 

BiSHOl'S   OF 

Bishops  of 

Canterbury. 

(i.e.  OF  St. 
Augustine's). 

Rochester. 

DUNWICH. 

647 

Honorius. 

Petronius. 

Ithamar. 

641 

Felix. 

64S 

,, 

„ 

642 

,, 

649 

J, 

„ 

643 

„ 

650 

,, 

,, 

644 

,, 

6si 

jj 

,j 

645 

„ 

652 

j^ 

J, 

646 

,, 

653 

Interregnum. 

„ 

647 

Thomas. 

654 

Deusdedit. 

Nathanael. 

,, 

648 

655 

„ 

J, 

649 

656 

J, 

,, 

650 

„ 

657 

,, 

Damian. 

651 

„ 

65S 

,, 

J, 

652 

Berchtgils       or 

659 

J, 

J, 

653 

Boniface. 

660 

J, 

11 

654 

„ 

661 

,, 

655 

662 

,, 

,, 

656 

663 

jj 

,, 

657 

664 

Death   of   Deus- 
dedit,      who 
probably    died 
of  the  plague. 

Death  of  Dam- 
ian    (?),    who 
probably  died 
of  the  plague. 

658 

659 
660 
661 
662 
663 

66s 
666 
667 
668 

66q 

Death  of  Boni- 
face. 

THE  EPISCOPAL  SUCCESSION  FROM 
AUGUSTINE  TO  DAMIAN  1 


Augustine. 


Laurentius, 
iine  prole. 


Mellitus, 
iine  prole. 


Justus. 


Romanus, 
Rochester, 
sine  prole. 


Paulinus, 
York  and 
Rochester. 

Honorius. 


Thomas, 
sine  prole. 


Ithamar. 

Deusdedit. 

I 
Damian, 
sine  prole. 


^  This  table  I  owe  to  Bishop  Browne. 
Ixxxvi 


Boniface, 
sinepreU. 


GENEALOGY  OF  THE  KINGS  OF  KENT  AND  ESSEX 


^Ethelberht. 


KORMENRIC, 

King  of  Kent. 


Bertha, 
d.  of  Charibert, 
King  of  Paris. 


sine  prolt. 


-t.DBALD.  _  Bertha,         ^thelberga.  ^dwin, 

I        I  his  step-mother.  I  King  of 

I I  Northumbria. 

sine  prole. 


RiCULA. 


Sledda, 
King  of  Essex. 


I 

S.MJEKCHT  or  SeBERT. 


SiGEBAL 


/ErMENRED.       .(ErCONBERHT.  SeXBURGA,  yENSWITHA, 

(/.of  Anna,  sine  prole. 

King  of  East 
Anglia. 


GENEALOGY  OF  THE  KINGS  OF  EAST  ANGLIA 


Tytla. 


Redwald. 


Eni. 


EORPWALD, 

sine  prole. 


Sigeberht 

(the  learned), 

sine  prole.* 


Ethelhere. 


Hereswid. 


Ethelwold, 
sine  prole. 


Sex-  Ercon-  St. 

BUKGA.  BERHT,  EtHEL- 

I  King  of  BURGA, 

I  Kent.  sine  prole. 


Tunbert.      ^thel-       Ecgfied,        Wit-        Aldwulf.    Alfwo 

I  DREDA.  King  of         BURGA  (?), 

I J    I  North-        sine  prole. 

I                              umbria. 
sine  prole.       \ I 


sine  prole. 


Ecgric,  a  kinsman  of  Sigeberht,  was  put  on  the  throne  on  the  abdication  of  the  latter.     He  died  sine  proh 


Ixxxvii 


GENEALOGY  OF  THE  KINGS  OF  DEIRA 


.EARL, 
:ig  of  the 
ercians. 


Uffi. 

I 
Aelle. 


jEDWIN; 


^ID.      /EUFRID. 


Wusc- 

FRED, 

sine 
jirole. 


i^THELBURGA, 

d.  of  Eadbald, 
King  of  Kent. 


ACHA, 

married 

/Ethelfrid, 

King  of 

Bernicia. 


/Enfleda, 

married 
Oswy,  King 
of  Bernicia, 

sine  prole. 


.^DEL- 
HUN. 


jEthel- 

DRED. 


OSRIC. 

I 
OsWY. 


Unknown. 


Hekeric.      Beorh 

I  TRIG. 


Hilda. 


Heres 

WID. 


GENEALOGY  OF  THE  KINGS  OF  BERNICIA 


.iEthelric. 

I 

/^LTHELFRID. 


AcHA, 

sister  of  ^Edwin, 
King  of  Deira. 


sine  prole. 


./Eanfred.        Oswald.        Oswy. 


OSWUDU. 


Oslac.        Oslaf.       /Ebe 


ADDENDA 

My  attention  has  been  called  by  Mr.  E.  G.  Gardner  to  an 
ambiguity  in  my  description  of  his  edition  of  the  Dialogues  of 
Pope  Gregory  in  my  former  volume.  He  tells  me  that  he  alone 
is  responsible  for  the  notes,  Mr.  Hill  having  merely  contributed 
the  descriptions  of  the  plates. 

Page  xlvii,  lines  1 1,  etc.  By  an  inadvertence  I  have  attributed 
the  lines  in  inverted  commas  to  Father  Mann  himself.  They 
are  really  quoted  by  him  from  Cardinal  Pitra.  The  whole 
passage  taken  from  Pitra  should  be  read  by  those  who  want 
to  study  the  utterly  unscientific  way  in  which  that  much- 
trusted  Roman  Catholic  historian  treated  his  authorities, — a 
more  credulous  unscientific  method  it  would  be  difficult  to 
imagine. 

Page  2  1.  I  have  inserted  a  photograph  of  this  table  in  my 
volume  on  Gregory.  It  only  reached  me  after  the  text  of  that 
book  was  written,  so  that  I  could  not  accompany  the  descrip- 
tion with  a  picture. 

Pages  39  and  40.  A  more  careful  consideration  of  the  facts  has 
led  me  to  doubt  the  universal  conclusion  in  regard  to  the  paternity 
of  Queen  Bertha  which  I  have  adopted  in  the  text,  and  which  is 
based  on  the  statement  of  Gregory  of  Tours.  I  now  think  the 
difficulty  of  the  chronology  makes  it  possible  that  she  was  the 
daughter  of  Charibert,  King  of  Paris.  I  am  disposed  to  think 
now  that  Gregory  of  Tours  may  have  been  mistaken,  and  that 
she  was  in  all  probability  the  daughter  of  Chlothaire,  the  second 
King  of  Neustria,  and  therefore  sister  of  Dagobert  the  First.  This 
explains  other  things.  Thus  Thomas  of  Elmham  actually  makes 
her  the  daughter  of  Dagobert,  and  not  of  Charibert.  Again, 
when  iEthelberga,  daughter  of  Bertha,  was  driven  out  of 
Northumberland  she  sent  the  royal  children  to  the  court  of 
Dagobert  to  be  brought  up.  Bede  says  of  the  princes  :  "  Misit  i?t 
Galliam    nutriendos    regi    Daegberecto    qui    erat   amicus   illius.'^ 


xc  ADDENDA 

Bede,  it  is  true,  says  amicus  and  not  fraier,  but  he  may  have  been 
mistaken  in  this.  The  explanation  here  given  also  accounts  for 
the  number  of  young  princesses  from  England  who  took  the  veil  in 
nunneries  in  Dagobert's  realm. 

Page  59.  "  The  Harbour  of  Richborough  is  described 
emphatically  as  '  statio  tranqiiilla'  ^  It  was  that  most  affected 
by  the  Romans ;  indeed,  we  never  hear  of  an  Emperor,  general, 
or  army  landing  at  any  other  place,  and  its  almost  exclusive  use 
seems  to  have  made  it  a  household  word  at  Rome  among  poets 
and  others."  2 

Elstob  has  translated  an  Anglo-Saxon  verse  given  by  Hickes, 
referring  to  the  traditional  season  when  Augustine's  landing  took 
place.     It  runs  thus  : — 

When  rough  March  begins 
Loudly  boisterous, 
Bearded  with  grey  frost, 
With  showers  of  rattling  hail 
He  terrifies  the  world. 
When  eleven  days  are  past, 
Then  did  Gregory, 
That  glorious  saint, 
In  Britain  most  renowned, 
Amidst  the  Heavenly  host 
Illustrious  shine. ^ 

Page  65.  In  Mr.  E.  G.  P.  Wyatt's  interesting  Memoir  oft  St. 
Gregory,  and  the  Gregorian  Music  published  by  the  Plain-Song 
and  Mediaeval  Music  Society,  there  is  a  conjectural  setting  of 
this  litany.* 

Page  97.  The  arguments  against  the  chair  being  Augustine's 
are,  says  Stanley  :  ist,  the  use  of  Purbeck  marble  in  it ;  and  2nd, 
the  fact  that  it  is  made  of  one  stone,  while  Eadmer  says  the 
original  was  made  of  several. 

Page  128.  A  dalmatic  was  a  long,  sleeved,  white  tunic,  with 
a  purple  band  [clavus)  from  either  side  of  the  neck  downwards 
(Isidore,  Etym.  xix.  22,  speaks  of  it  as  ^^  tunica  sacerdotalis  Candida 
cum  clavis  ex  purpura").  It  was  and  is  a  clerical,  but  not  a  priestly 
garment,  and  could  be  worn  by  every  clerk  in  orders  when 
taking  part  in  the  service,  from  a  deacon  up  to  a  pope,  and  was 
so  called  from  having  been  first  used  in  Dalmatia.     It  was  not 

^  Amiii.  Mar.  xxvii.  9.  -  T.  G.  Faussett,  Arch.  Joiirnaly  xxxii.  372. 

^  Elstob,  Appendix  to  ^.-.S",  Hotnily,  p.  26. 
*  Vide  op.  cit.  p.  7, 


ADDENDA  xci 

only  used  by  ecclesiastics,  but  also,  as  I  have  said,  by  kings  and 
emperors  on  solemn  occasions. 

Page    171.    This    fabulous   story   about    the  foundation   of 
Westminster  Abbey  is  told   in  several  mediaeval  tracts.     Some 
of  them  were  printed  by  Dugdale  in  his  Mojtasticon,  one  only 
having  an  author's  name,  namely,  Sulcardus,  who  was  a  monk  of 
Westminster.      As    this    is   dedicated    to   Abbot   Vitalis,    who 
flourished    1076-82,    it    gives    us    its    date.        The    tomb    of 
Sulcardus,     according     to    Pits,    was    in     the    Abbey    in    his 
time,  and  bore  the  words,  Sulcardus  t?ionachus  et  chronigraphus?- 
The  story  was  incorporated  by  two  such  responsible  historians  as 
William  of  Malmesbury  and  Ralph  of  Diss,  and  is  also  referred 
to  in  a  famous  charter  attributed  to  King  Eadgar,  which  is  a 
measure  of  the  credulity  of  the  times  and  of  the  daring  flights 
which  the  monkish  reporters  of  miracles  were  willing  to  take.    As 
it  is  picturesque,  it  may  interest  my  readers,  being  a  fair  sample  of 
mediaeval  thought,  and  I  therefore  propose  to  condense  it  from 
the  various  reports  in  Dugdale.     They  tell  us  that  the  original 
Abbey  was  built  by  King  Sabercht  of  Essex.     When  the  building 
was  finished  and  the  time  had  come  when  it  was  to  be  conse- 
crated, Mellitus  the  Bishop  went  to  perform  the  ceremony,  and 
was  encamped  in  some  tents  or  booths  half  a  mile   from  the 
building  {fixis  tentoriis  a  diinidio  viileario).       On  the   evening 
of  the  Sunday,   when  the  ceremony   was   to    be   performed,    a 
person  in  the  garb  of  a  traveller  who  was  on  the  other  side  of 
the  Thames,  summoned  a  fisherman  to  ferry  him  over  to  the 
church,  offering  him  a  reward,  and  bade  him  wait  in  order  to 
take   him    back.     The    boatman   was   struck    by   the    majestic 
appearance  of  the  traveller.     After  he  had  entered  the  new  church 
he  noticed  that  it  became  suffused  with  flaming  light,  and  heard 
an  angelic  choir  singing  partly  within  and  partly  without,  while 
the   angels  were  seen  ascending  and  descending  a  ladder  like 
that   of  Jacob.     Presently   the   strange  visitor  returned  to  the 
astonished  boatman.     As  they  were  recrossing  the  river  he  bade 
the  fisherman  cast    out   his  net,   which  he  did,  and  thereupon 
caught  a  great  multitude  of  fish  which  almost  sank   the  boat. 
Among  these  was  a  large  salmon  {Salmo),  which  the  traveller 
picked  out,  bidding  the  fisherman  present  it  to  Mellitus  and  to 
say  that  St.  Peter  had  sent  it  to  him,  while  he  was  to  retain  all 
the  rest  for  himself  in  payment  for  his  services.     He  further  told 

^  See  Wright,  Biog.  Britt.  ii.  45. 


xdi  ADDENDA 

him  that  he  was,  in  fact,  St.  Peter  ("  the  heavenly  janitor,"  as  one  of 
the  tracts  call  him),  and  that  he  had  been  to  consecrate  the 
church,  which  he  had  determined  to  dedicate  to  himself.  He 
bade  him  tell  all  this  to  Mellitus.  In  the  morning  the  fisherman 
went  to  the  Bishop  with  the  salmon,  and  reported  his  adventure. 
The  latter  was  greatly  astonished,  and  on  opening  the  doors  of 
the  BasiUca  he  found  all  the  signs  of  the  church  having  been 
consecrated.  The  pavement  was  inscribed  with  certain  letters 
alphabeti  iiiscriptione  signatum  (one  account  says  in  both  Greek 
and  Latin  letters) ;  the  wall  was  marked  in  consecrated  oil 
with  a  number  of  crosses  in  twelve  places  {paj-iete?n  bis  sents  in 
locis  sanctificatis  oleo  litnm),  while  there  were  also  there  the 
remains  of  twelve  half-burnt  candles.  Assured  that  the  state- 
ment of  the  fisherman  was  genuine,  the  Bishop  informed 
the  people,  who  with  one  voice  glorified  God.  One  of  the 
notices  says  that  the  fish  was  called  Esiceus,  and  it  adds : 
Ab  ilia  itaque  usque  in  hodier?iam  diem  ejus  piscatoris  progenies 
Esiciorum  decimacionem  Deo  et  sancto  Petro,  prout  audent, 
conferunt} 

Stubbs,  in  referring  to  the  fabulous  account,  adds  that 
nothing  is  known  of  Westminster  till  the  time  of  Dunstan. 
When  the  Saxon  Church  there  was  afterwards  amplified  by  the 
Confessor,  it  was  natural  to  look  out  for  an  early  founder  for  it, 
and  to  attribute  it  to  the  first  Bishop  of  London  ;  so  when  the 
life  of  Erkenwald  was  written,  his  education  was  naturally 
assigned  to  Mellitus  as  the  Apostle  of  London.  Baronius,  whose 
credulous  suggestions  have  no  limit,  goes  so  far  as  to  suggest 
that  the  chief  business  of  the  alleged  visit  of  Mellitus  to  Rome 
was  in  connection  with  the  consecration  of  Westminster. 
Thomas  of  Elmham  has  invented  a  second  visit  of  Mellitus  to 
Rome  in  connection  with  the  alleged  introduction  of  monks  at 
Christchurch,  Canterbury.- 

In  regard  to  this  earliest  known  school  at  Canterbury,  we 
read  in  the  life  of  St.  Furseus,  as  paraphrased  by  Bede,  how 
Sigeberht,  King  of  the  East  Angles,  having  become  a  Christian, 
founded  a  school  and  obtained  a  bishop,  Felix,  from  Kent,  and 
we  are  told  appointed  pedagogues  and  masters  for  the  boys,  after 
the  fashion  of  Canterbury  {eisque  paedagogos  ac  fnagistros  juxta 
morem  Cantuat-iorut/i  praebenie).'^     This  Canterbury  school  thus 

^  Dugdale,  Man.  ed.  1655,  vol.  i.  55-58. 

^  Op.  cit.  ed.  Haidwick,  134.  ^  Bede,  iii.  ch.  18. 


ADDENDA  xciii 

referred  to  in  630  can  only  have  been  founded  by  Augustine,  as 
Mr.  Plummer  suggests. 

Page  179.  A  ghost  story  was  told  of  St.  Augustine's  tomb, 
namely,  that  on  one  occasion  when  its  keeper  had  greatly 
neglected  it,  a  blaze  of  light  filled  all  the  church.  In  the  midst 
of  it  there  appeared  a  boy  with  a  torch  in  his  hand,  and  with 
long  golden  hair  about  his  shoulders.  His  face  was  as  white  as 
snow,  and  his  eyes  like  stars.  He  rebuked  the  attendant  for  his 
neglect,  and  then  withdrew  again  into  his  tomb. 

As  late  as  the  time  of  James  i.,  a  monument  used  to  be 
shown  in  the  eastern  transept  of  the  church  at  Reculver, 
claiming,  says  Stanley,  to  be  the  tomb  of  ^thelberht.  On  it  was 
the  inscription — "  Here  lies  Ethelbert,  Kentish  King  whilom." 
This,  says  Stanley,  may  have  been  ^thelberht  the  Second.  Bede's 
testimony  makes  it  clear  that  ^thelberht  the  First  was  buried  at 
Canterbury. 

Page  192.  As  to  the  ritual  introduced  by  St.  Augustine,  a 
few  additional  words  may  be  said.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  substantially  it  was  that  then  used  at  Rome.  When  Arch- 
bishop /F^thelheard  demanded  from  the  prelates  at  the  Council 
of  Clovesho  in  798  an  exposition  of  their  faith  {ibi  sollicito  ab 
eis  scrutinio  quaesivimus  qualiter  apud  eos  fides  catholica  haberetur 
et  quomodo  Christiana  religio  exercereiur),  they  replied  unani- 
mously: '■'•  NotiDJi  sit paieniitati  tune,  quia  siciit  primitns  a  sanda 
Roma7ia  et  apostolica  sede,  beatissimo  Papa  Gregorio  dirigejite^ 
exarata  est,  ita  crediinus."  ^ 

The  Faith  they  claimed  to  be  the  same,  but  in  accordance 
with  his  own  practice  Gregory  had  conjoined  them  to  qualify  the 
Roman  use  by  those  of  other  Churches,  and  notably  that  of  Gaul, 
in  cases  where  they  should  deem  it  better — that  is,  more  edifying. 
Dr.  Bright  says  of  Augustine  that  he  apparently  inserted  in 
the  liturgy  the  Gallic  benedictio  populi,  and,  as  he  says,  the  16th 
Canon  of  the  Council  of  Clovesho  in  747  seems  to  imply 
that  there  then  existed  certain  other  variations  in  the  English 
Mass  book.  Again  he  says  :  "  We  infer  from  a  letter  of  Alcuin 
to  Eanbald  11.,  Archbishop  of  York  in  the  end  of  the  eighth 
century,  that  there  were  then  in  use  some  larger  sacramentaries 
representing  'an  old  use'  which  did  not  entirely  agree  with  the 
Roman."  2      As    we   saw   in   the   former    volume,    St.    Gregory 

^  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  512. 

2  Alcuin,  Eps.  171  ;  Op.  1-231  ;  Bright,  103  and  104. 


xciv  ADDENDA 

apparently  made  a  change  in  the  services  of  the  Canonical 
Hours,  so  that  the  Use  on  the  subject,  at  his  Monastery  of 
St.  Andrew's,  was  different  to  the  standard  Benedictine  one, 
and  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  it  was  Gregory's  Rule  on  the 
subject  that  was  introduced  into  England  by  Augustine.  The 
Canterbury  monks  apparently,  presently  adopted  the  Rule  of 
St.  Benedict  on  the  subject.  St.  Dunstan,  however,  out  of 
veneration  for  St.  Gregory,  ordered  the  monks  to  change  the 
course  of  St.  Benedict  for  that  of  St.  Gregory  during  Easter 
week.^  Lanfranc  cared  less  for  the  apostle  of  the  Saxons  and 
abolished  the  custom. - 

It  was  beUeved  in  the  English  Church,  according  to  Haddan 
and  Stubbs,  as  early  as  the  eighth  century,  when  it  is  assumed 
in  the  answers  ascribed  to  Archbishop  Ecgbert  by  the  Council 
of  Enham  in  the  eleventh  century,  that  Pope  Gregory  gave  the 
English  a  rule  for  the  observance  of  the  Ember  days.  In  his 
Dialogue  Egbert  says  :  the  English  Church  kept  the  first  Ember 
fast  "  iit  fioster  didascalus  beaius  Gregorius,  in  suo  Antiphonario 
et  Missali  Libra,  per  pedagogu/n  nostmm  beatuni  Augustinum 
transmissit  ordinatum  et  rescriptum.'^  ^  Such  a  rule  is  given  by 
Muratori,  but  Haddan  and  Stubbs  doubt  the  authenticity  of 
the  injunction  in  the  form  there  given.  It  provides  for  four 
fasts — spring,  summer,  autumn,  and  winter.  The  first  in  the 
first  hebdomada  of  Quadragesima.  The  second  hebdomada 
after  Pentecost.  The  third  in  the  full  hebdomada  before  the 
autumnal  equinox,  and  the  fourth  in  the  full  hebdomada 
before  Christmas.  The  fast  to  be  always  on  the  sixth  day, 
except  from  Easter  to  Pentecost,  and  when  it  happens  to  be  a 
great  fast  day."* 

In  a  letter  written  by  St.  Boniface  to  Pope  Zacharias,  he 
reports  that  a  certain  layman  of  great  position  had  reported  to 
him  that  in  the  time  of  Gregory  he  had  given  permission  for 
people  to  marry  an  uncle's  widow,  or  a  cousin's  wife,  or  people 
in  the  third  degree  of  consanguinity,  and  he  had  himself  taken 
advantage  of  the  licence.  Boniface  declares  that  he  cannot 
believe  this  to  be  true,  since  in  a  Synod  of  London  held  in 

'  Septem  horae  cationicae  a  inonachis  in  Ecdesia  Dei  more  cationicorum 
propter  auctoritatem  S.    Gregorii  celebrandae  sunt  {Co}tcord.   Monach.,    iii. 

899). 

^  Wilk,  Cone,  inter  Const.  Lanfr.,  i.  399,  quoted  by  Lingard,  i.  301  note. 
^  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  411  and  412  ;  Plummer,  Bede,  56  and  57. 
*  Mansi,  x.  446 ;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  52  and  53. 


ADDENDA  xcv 

transmarine  Saxony,  i.e.  in  England,  a  country  where  he  was 
born  and  brought  up,  which  Church  had  been  founded  by 
the  disciples  of  St.  Gregory,  i.e.  Augustine,  Laurence,  Justus, 
and  Mellitus,  it  had  been  affirmed  that  such  marriages  involved 
a  very  serious  wicked  incest  and  a  horrible  and  a  damnable 
wickedness  according  to  Holy  Scripture.^ 

In  a  letter  from  Pope  Zacharias  to  Boniface,  he  reports  that 
in  an  English  Synod  held  under  Theodore  in  the  country  where 
Augustine,  Laurence,  Justus,  and  Honorius  (Mellitus  is  curiously 
not  mentioned)  had  first  preached  the  faith,  it  had  been  declared 
that  Baptism,  when  only  one  person  of  the  Trinity  was  involved, 
was  invalid. - 

Gratian,  the  source  of  many  sophisticated  and  false  docu- 
ments which  passed  current  in  prgecritical  days  (in  this  case 
he  derived  them  from  Ivo  Decret.  iv.  29),  publishes  a  number  of 
fragments  professing  to  be  derived  from  letters  of  Augustine, 
which  are  false  according  to  Jaffe.  They  prescribe  rules  for  the 
use  of  meat,  fish  or  wine,  milk,  eggs,  and  cheese  on  Sundays 
by  those  in  "Orders."^ 

Page  211.  Bishop  Stubbs,  referring  to  the  alleged  decrees  of 
this  Council  of  Rome  in  his  article  on  Mellitus  in  the  Did.  of 
Chr.  Biog.,  says  they  are  most  suspicious.  They  state  that  they 
were  meant  to  secure  peace  for  the  monks  {de  vita  7)iotiachoru7n  et 
quiete  orditiationis).  Stubbs  adds  that  two  versions  of  the  decree 
are  extant,  both  of  which  he  says  are  spurious.  In  them 
attempts  to  restrain  the  monks  from  undertaking  any  priestly 
office  are  forbidden.  Cp.  Labbe,  Co7ic.  v.  619  ;  Mansi,  Cone. 
X.  504;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  64  and  65. 

It  was  to  Mellitus  as  Bishop  that  ^thelberht  in  a  forged 
charter  is  made  to  endow  the  Church  of  London  with  the 
Manor  of  Tillingham.'* 

Page  212.  Dr.  Bright,  speaking  of  the  Monastery  of  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul  at  Canterbury,  says  :  "  The  monastery  as  it  grew  in 
resources,  became  a  conspicuous  specimen  of  monastic  exemp- 
tion from  diocesan  rule ;  it  was  called  "  the  Roman  Chapel  in 
England,"  as  being  immediately  subject  to  the  Pope  (see  the 
documents  quoted  by  Elmham).''     Eugenius  the  Third  said  that 

1  Eps.  of  Boniface,  ed.  Wlirdlvvein,  p.  108  ;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  pp.  50-51. 
-  Epp.  Bon.,  ed.  Wiirdtwein,  Ixxxii.  ;  Haddon  and  Stubbs,  iii.  51  and  52. 
'^  Gratian,  Dist.  iv.  Canon  vi.  ''  V'ide  ante,  v.  215. 

''  ed.  Hardwick,  pp.  386,  392,  and  404. 


xcvi  ADDENDA 

the  monastery  was  Beati  Petri  juris,  etc.,  while  an  earlier  Pope, 
Agatho,  forbade  any  sacerdos  (bishop)  to  exercise  authority  in  the 
monastery  {praeier  sedem  apostolicam),  it  being  specially  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  Rome.  Its  community  carried  on  a  tradition 
of  jealous  independence  as  regards  the  archbishop,  and  a  sort 
of  standing  feud  with  their  neighbours  of  the  metropolitan 
cathedral,  and  did  not  shrink  from  documentary  frauds  in 
support  of  their  programme.^ 

Page  213.  Thome  says  that  there  was  a  statue  of  y^thelberht 
in  the  East  Chapel  (perhaps  the  apse  is  meant)  of  the  Church 
of  St.  Pancras.  ^  This  has,  of  course,  been  long  since 
destroyed.  There  was  still  to  be  seen,  however,  in  the  fifteenth 
century  in  the  screen  of  the  church  a  figure  of  the  sainted  King 
holding  a  church  in  his  hand. 

Page  223.  In  view  of  the  very  slight  intercourse  between 
Rome  and  the  Church  of  Gaul  at  this  time,  it  will  be  well  to  refer 
to  one  proof  that  Aries  still  obtained  thence  the  recognised 
metropolitan  badge  of  its  Bishop. 

In  a  letter  of  Theodoric  11.,  King  of  Burgundy,  written  on 
August  23,  613,  printed  in  the  Mon.  Gerin.  Hist,  Epp.  6,  p.  455 
{vide),  and  written  to  Boniface  the  Fourth,  he  asks  for  the  pallium 
to  be  sent  to  the  newly  consecrated  Archbishop  of  Aries,  named 
Florian.  The  Pope  commends  to  the  King  the  care  of  the 
Church  and  of  its  Patrimony  in  Gaul,  while  in  a  letter  written 
directly  to  Florian  °  he  states  that  he  had  sent  the  pallium, 
speaks  of  the  good  reports  which  had  reached  him  of  the 
Archbishop,  and  begs  him  to  put  down  simony,  and  to  live 
worthily,  and  he  also  commends  to  him  the  Patrimony  of 
which  Candidus  still  had  the  care. 

Page  23 T.  Sabercht,  sometimes  called  Saba,  King  of  Essex, 
and  patron  of  Bishop  Mellitus  according  to  Stubbs,  probably 
died  in  the  same  year  as  his  uncle  /Ethelberht,  i.e.  616. 
We  are  told  that  he  was  buried  at  Westminster,  and  when 
in  1308  his  alleged  tomb  was  opened  to  allow  of  the  transfer 
of  his  bones,  his  right  hand  and  arm  are  said  to  have  been 
found  covered  with  flesh  and  uncorrupted.^  As  Stubbs  says, 
Sabercht's  sons  must  have  been  grown  up  at  the  time  of  his 
conversion,  for  they  continued  heathens  at  the  time  of  his  death, 

^  Bright,  113-114  and  notes, 

-  Op.  cit.  wjT.  3  /^,  p,  453_ 

*  Annates  Paulini,  p.  140;   Cliron.  S.  Paiili,  ed.  Simpson,  p.  225. 


ADDENDA  xcvii 

which  took  place  probably  about  6i6.^  According  to  Bede, 
Sabercht  had  three  sons.  Florence  of  Worcester  in  his  genealogies 
gives  the  names  of  two  of  them,  Saexraed  and  Saeward.^  The  third, 
on  very  slight  grounds,  was  named  Sigeberht  by  Brompton.^ 

Page  236.  In  a  life  of  St.  Laurence  by  Gocelin,  which  is  still 
unpublished,^  are  some  fabulous  tales  about  a  journey  he  is  sup- 
posed to  have  made  to  Scotland,  and  a  story  about  the  Church  at 
Fordoun  into  which  Queen  Margaret  was  unable  to  enter. 

Bishop  Stubbs  says  that  out  of  250  churches  in  England 
dedicated  to  St.  Laurence,  some  few  may  have  been  dedicated 
to  the  Archbishop.^  One  in  the  Isle  of  Thanet  may  pretty 
certainly  be  claimed  to  have  been  so. 

Page  242.  Some  relics  of  St.  Mellitus  were  preserved  at  St. 
Paul's  in  1298.^ 

Page  243.  In  regard  to  the  hortatory  letter  of  Boniface  here 
mentioned,  Stubbs  reminds  us  that  some  such  letter  was  referred 
to  by  the  eight  English  Bishops  who  about  805  wrote  to  Pope 
Leo  the  Third,  asking  for  the  pall  for  the  Archbishop.  In 
that  letter  the  Pope  says  of  Mellitus  and  Justus  :  "  Qui  ambo 
susceperunt  scripta  exhortatoria  a  poniifice  Romanae  et  apostolicae 
sedis  Bonifacio,  data  sibi  ordinandi  episcopos  auctoritate ;  cujus 
auctoritatis  ista  est  forma.     Delectissimo  fratri  Jiisto  Bonifacius." 

There  is  preserved  in  the  Canterbury  archives  an  ancient  list 
of  palls.  Among  the  recipients  of  the  vestment  Mellitus  is  men- 
tioned, and  Gervase  of  Canterbury  and  Ralph  de  Diceto  both  say 
that  he  received  a  pall.  Gervase  accounts  for  the  fact  by 
supposing  that  the  Pope  sent  three  palls  to  St.  Augustine, 
for  the  three  churches  of  Canterbury,  London,  and  York,  and 
that  they  were  used  by  the  three  first  archbishops ;  but,  as  Stubbs 
says,  the  story  is  based  on  a  mistake,  adding  that  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  neither  Laurence  nor  Mellitus  ever  received  a  pall, 
hence  probably  why  they  consecrated  no  bishops.'' 

Page  257.  The  Derwent  (the  White  or  Clear  Water)  is  a  tribu- 
tary of  the  Ouse.  At  Aldby,  says  Freeman:  "There  stood  a 
royal  house  of  the  Northumbrian  kings,  the  apparent  site  of 
which,  ...  a  mound  surrounded  by  a  fosse,  still  looks  down 
on  a  picturesque  point  of  the  course  of  the  river.^ 

1  D.C.B.  iv.  594.  2  M.H.B.  629. 

^  Ed.  Twysden,  c.  743.  *  See  Hardy's  Catalogtie,  i.  217,  218. 

5  D.C.B.  iii.  632.  «  See  Stubbs,  D.C.B.  iii.  900. 

■^  Stubbs,  D.C.B.  iii.  901.  ^  Freeman,  iii.  355. 


xcviii  ADDENDA 

Page  259.  In  the  letters  attributed  to  Pope  Boniface  the  Fifth, 
which  I  have  argued  are  spurious,  there  are  two  sentences  which 
are  archaeologically  of  some  interest.  He  professes  to  send 
King  ^Edwin  as  blessings  from  his  protector,  St.  Peter,  a  camisia 
or  soldier's  shirt  ^  ornamented  with  gold  and  a  camp  cloak  (lena) 
of  Ancyran  fashion,  while  to  /Ethelberga  he  sends  a  silver  mirror 
and  a  gilt  ivory  comb.^ 

Page  262.  Taylor,  in  his  Words  mid  Places^  gives  the  meaning 
of  the  name  Goodmundham,  as  the  place  ijiavi)  of  the  protection 
{inund)  of  the  Gods,  which  seems  to  me  very  doubtful.  It  is 
probably  made  up,  like  many  similar  place  names  of  the  same 
class,  from  a  personal  or  family  name,  Godmund  and  ham.  This 
is  also  suggested  in  Murray's  Yorkshire. 

Page  263.  In  regard  to  the  story  of  Run,  Dr.  Bright  says  it 
is  plainly  a  Welsh  fiction,  possibly  based  on  some  confusion 
between  Paulinus  and  Paul  Hen,  the  Welsh  founder  of  Whitland, 
in  which  Bede's  account  of  Paulinus  is  transferred  to  Run. 
Urbgen  or  Urien,  the  father  of  Run,  had  fought  against  Theodoric 
forty  years  before.  Two  Welsh  MSS.  of  Nennius,  appealing  to 
the  authority  of  two  Welsh  Bishops,  read  Run  .  .  .  i.e.  Paulinus. 
Dr.  Bright  says  the  equation  is  to  him  incredible.  It  has, 
however,  been  favoured  by  Bishop  Browne.^ 

Page  263.  The  wooden  sanctuary  here  mentioned,  according  to 
Raine,"*  was  carefully  preserved  and  enriched  with  splendid  altars 
and  vessels  by  Archbishop  Albert.^  Dr.  Bright  adds  that  the 
remains  in  the  crypt  at  York  Minster,  assigned  by  some  to 
Paulinus,  have  been  attributed  by  others  to  Archbishop  Albert 
just  named.*^  The  only  thing  which  actually  commemorated 
Paulinus  at  York  Minster  was  an  altar  jointly  dedicated  to  him 
and  St.  Chad.''' 

Page  269.  The  only  memorial  I  know  of  Justus  is  the  name 
of  St.  Just,  to  which  the  church  of  Penwith,  in  remote  Cornwall, 
is  dedicated. 

Page  319.  Sigeberht,  who  is  called  Christianissimus  atque 
doctissiinus  by  Bede  ^  and  also  boniis  et  religiosus,^  became  King 
of  East  Anglia.  He  was  apparently  a  stepson  and  not  a  son 
of   Redwald.      The   pedigrees   in   Florence   of  Worcester  and 

^  Jerome,  Eps.  Ixiv.  2. 

-  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  77  and  79;  Bright,  131. 

^  See  Bright,  135,  note.  ^  Historians  of  York,  i.  104. 

*  See  Bright,  136,  note.  ^  lb.  "^  Raine,  D.C.B.  iv.  249. 

8  Op.  cit.  ii.  15.  9  iii,  18. 


ADDENDA  xcix 

William  of  Malmesbury  do  not  make  him  his  son,  while  they 
make  him  a  brother  of  Eorpwald.  Florence  calls  h\m  /rater  suus 
ex  parte  matris}  and  William  of  Malmesbury  says  fratre  ejus  ex 
matre?  In  this  case  he  would  be  Redwald's  stepson,  and  this, 
perhaps,  accounts  for  his  having  been  driven  out  of  the  country 
by  the  latter.^  Pits  says  that  Sigeberht  corresponded  with 
Desiderius,  Bishop  of  Cahors,  and  that  his  letters  are  preserved 
at  St.  Gallen.4 

Page  327.  Bede  says  the  body  of  /Edwin  was  afterwards 
recovered  and  buried  at  Whitby.^ 

Page  333.  This  monastery,  of  which  St.  Eansuitha  was  the 
Abbess,  says  Bright,  was  washed  away  by  the  sea  in  the  six- 
teenth century.  In  1885  some  workmen  employed  in  the 
present  church  found  behind  the  altar  a  reliquary  containing  a 
skull  and  some  bones,  which  had  evidently  been  hid  there  at 
the  Reformation.  I  have  given  a  photograph  of  it.  These  relics 
of  the  foundress  are  now  preserved  in  a  closed  recess  on  the 
north  side  of  the  sanctuary.^  She  is  still,  says  Bright,  re- 
membered as  the  local  saint. 

1  F.C.  W.  Y.  i.  260.  2  ^_  jif^  I  g7_ 

^  Inimicitias  Redualdi fugiens — Bede,  iii.  18.  *  Smith,  Bede,  iii.  18. 

®  iii.  24.  ^  Op.  cit.  126,  note  2. 


vBebbanburh 


ENGLAND 

A.D.  597    to    652. 


Hrofeceastre  '^^i^-'^^"^?^  I  L  IN  L  I 

CCantwarabyri^    --   Retesbur^h 

SUTH     SEAXNA   7Q 


To  face  p.  i. 


SAINT    AUGUSTINE    OF 
CANTERBURY 

CHAPTER    I 

Having  surveyed  the  life  and  work  of  Saint 
Gregory  from  his  birth  to  his  death,  as  it  affected 
other  parts  of  Europe,  we  are  now  in  a  position  to 
understand    rather    better    the   meaning   and    the 


ERRATA. 


Page  34.     For  "  Christianitas  "  read  "  Christianitatis." 
Page  4 1 ,  footnote.     For  "  Brown  "  read  "  Browne." 
Pao^e  53.     For  "  'Povroviriai "  read  "  'Povtovitim" 
Page  65,  last  line  but  two.     For  "  though  "  read  "  since." 


j^ ^  v^j^v- o  y  Ljiyjii  III  1113  iiiiabiuiiary  worK. 

Caesar's    two    voyages   to    Britain    were    mere 
transient  raids.     It  was  a  hundred  years  later  that 

X 


Bebbanburh 


ENGLAND 

A.D.  597    to    652. 


P^ 


sCetereht 
"\        D      E      R^A? 

^Eqrfet.viv,  y  ,  ^    ^Godmu\dingaham 


To  face  p.  i. 


SAINT    AUGUSTINE    OF 
CANTERBURY 

CHAPTER   I 

Having  surveyed  the  life  and  work  of  Saint 
Gregory  from  his  birth  to  his  death,  as  it  affected 
other  parts  of  Europe,  we  are  now  in  a  position  to 
understand  rather  better  the  meaning  and  the 
results  of  the  most  romantic  and  in  many  ways 
far-reaching  of  his  labours,  namely,  his  mission  to 
Britain. 

The  green  island,  girdled  and  buttressed  by  white 
cliffs,  which  lies  beyond  the  turbulent  "Channel,"  had 
exercised  a  great  fascination  over  the  greatest  of 
the  Ancient  Romans,  Julius  Caesar,  and  had  tempted 
him  to  prosecute  his  most  risky  and  picturesque 
venture.  Six  hundred  and  fifty  years  later,  it 
similarly  fascinated  the  greatest  Roman  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  Gregory,  to  make  another  venture, 
also  risky  and  picturesque,  and  the  fruits  of  which 
have  been  long-lived.  To  understand  that  venture 
we  must  look  at  a  bigger  horizon  than  bounded  the 
great  Pope's  vision  in  his  missionary  work. 

Caesar's  two  voyages  to  Britain  were  mere 
transient  raids.     It  was  a  hundred  years  later  that 


2         SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  conquest  of  the  island  began,  and  it  went  on 
till  the  greater  part  of  it  was  absorbed  in  the 
Empire.  It  presently  became  one  of  its  richest 
and  most  prosperous  provinces,  and  for  three 
centuries  and  a  half  it  benefited  by  its  laws,  its 
orderly  government,  and  administrative  skill.  Then 
it  passed  again  into  oblivion.  The  terrible  disasters 
which  overtook  Rome,  its  internal  decay,  the  load 
of  taxation  and  consequent  poverty  of  the  crowd, 
and  the  increasing  dissipation  and  luxury  of  the 
upper  classes,  had  sapped  the  Spartan  virility  of 
the  race,  and  destroyed  the  old  heroic  spirit  and 
fortitude  of  its  citizens.  These  virtues,  which  con- 
stituted the  great  prop  of  the  Roman  State,  had  all 
been  replaced  by  meaner  endowments. 

Its  armies  were  chiefly  recruited  by  mercenaries, 
and  were  wasted  in  cruel  fights  between  rival 
claimants  for  the  prizes  it  still  had  to  offer.  Mean- 
while the  stalwart  peoples  beyond  its  borders,  who 
had  been  kept  at  bay  by  the  discipline  of  the  Roman 
soldiery  and  the  skill  of  its  leaders,  began  to  have 
their  day.  Those  whose  relatives  when  defeated 
had  been  ruthlessly  slaughtered  or  made  to  supply 
the  craving  of  the  debased  Roman  crowd  for  bloody 
and  cruel  entertainments  in  the  circus,  came  faster 
and  faster  across  the  sacred  boundaries  of  the  state, 
and,  like  the  insects  that  thrive  on  rotten  trees,  or 
the  wolves  that  pursue  a  retreating  army,  they  made 
the  problems  of  revival  or  defence  almost  insoluble. 
Their  memories  were  reddened  with  many  lurid 
patches,  and  their  javelins  and  swords  completed 


THE  "PASSING''  OF  ROMAN  BRITAIN         3 

what  moral  and  material  decay  had  begun.     When 
this  took  place,  and  those  in  command  were  at  their 
wits'  ends  to  meet  the  ubiquitous  attacks,  it  was 
natural    and    necessary    to    abandon    the    isolated 
parts   of  the    Empire   where    the  cost  of  defence 
seemed    hardly    to    pay   for    the    benefits    secured. 
Thus  it  came  about  that  Britain,  which  had  always 
needed  a  strong  garrison  and  was  now  assailed  by 
foes  from  the  west  and  from  the  east,  from  Ireland 
and  from  Germany,  was  at  length  abandoned,  the 
soldiers    withdrawn    and     the     richer    and    more 
vigorous  among  its  civilian  population  who  could 
go,  went  away  to  Gaul  or  Italy.     Those  who  were 
left  were  mainly  peasants  and  labourers,  or  small 
farmers,  and  were  either  driven   into   the  western 
parts  of  the  island,  or  reduced  to  servitude.     Mean- 
while all  the  maritime  districts  from  the  Solent  to 
the    Firth   of   Forth   were   occupied    by   German- 
speaking  and  German-thinking  folk,  who  had  very 
few  amiable  ties  with  Roman  ways.     Gaul,  though 
in  a  less  degree,  also  saw  its  Roman  civilisation 
jeopardised    by    tribes    with    similar    endowments. 
They  made  access  to  Britain  by  Roman  travellers 
and  Roman  merchants  virtually  impossible,  for  they 
occupied  the    seaboard  of   the    Channel  along    its 
whole   length  on  either  side,  and    thus  controlled 
all  the  ports  of  departure  and  arrival.      It  required 
only  two  or  three  generations  of  this  paralysis  of 
communication  to  completely  destroy  the  memory  of 
such  a  place  as  Britain  among  the  ruling  classes 
either  in  the  western  or  the  eastern  Rome,  and  it  is 


4        SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

not  wonderful  that  it  should  have  passed  out  of 
men's  memories  and  that  its  name  should  have  had 
no  more  meaning  for  them  than  the  half-mythical 
lands  of  Thule  and  Scandia. 

How  much  this  was  the  case  may  be  gathered 
from  the  works  of  such  an  accomplished  and  gifted 
writer  as  Procopius,  who  flourished  in  the  busy 
reign  of  Justinian,  and  who  tells  us  only  fantastic 
fables  about  "  Brittia."  He  says  that  no  one  could 
live  in  the  mist  and  fog  beyond  the  Roman  wall, 
and  speaks  of  the  country  as  a  land,  whither  the 
ghosts  of  the  departed  were  ferried  by  night  by 
unseen  boatmen,  etc.  etc.  He  clearly  had  no  real 
knowledge  about  it.^ 

We  may  gather  the  same  conclusion  from  the 
abundant  writings  of  St.  Gregory,  who  had  some 
reason  for  curiosity.  The  preparations  made  for 
his  mission  to  the  Anglians,  and  the  references  he 
makes  to  them  in  his  letters,  show  how  scanty  his 
knowledge  really  was  until  his  monks  sent  him 
more  precise  information. 

The  same  causes  isolated  the  Celtic  peoples  of 
Wales  and  of  Ireland.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  their  Christianity  was  in  the  main  the  child 
of  post-Roman  times.  It  was  after  the  legions  had 
left,  and  when  the  land  was  being  harried  and 
worried  by  its  foreign  foes,  that  the  afflatus  for  the 
new  faith  spread  like  wildfire  among  these  im- 
pressionable folk,  and  created  a  great  crowd  of  de- 
votees, anchorites,  and  monks.     Their  Christianity 

^  Procopius,  de  bell.  Vandalico^  lib.  i.  chap.  i. 


BRITAIN  A  FORGOTTEN  LAND  5 

was  orthodox,  but  its  ties  were  with  Gaul  and  not 
Italy.  Lerins  and  Tours  were  its  foster-mothers, 
and  Brittany  and  Western  Gaul,  with  which  they 
kept  up  a  connection,  were  the  only  parts  of  the 
Continent  they  knew  much  about.  They  clung  to 
traditional  ritual  usages  which  had  once  prevailed 
widely  in  Gaul,  and  which  had  either  not  taken 
root  in  Italy  or  had  been  superseded  there.  They 
had  little  or  no  intercourse  with  Rome  during  the 
sixth  century,  and  the  traditional  Primacy  of  St. 
Peter's  chair  was  a  pious  legend  with  them  and 
no  more.  They  managed  their  own  discipline  and 
were  tenacious  of  their  own  customs.  The  Pope, 
although  he  knew  of  the  existence  of  the  British 
Church,  seems  from  his  letters  to  have  had  no 
detailed  or  even  partial  knowledge  of  its  ways,  and 
perhaps  doubted  its  orthodoxy.  The  great  island 
and  its  satellite  beyond  St.  George's  Channel  were, 
in  fact,  as  much  an  unknown  land  to  Gregory  as 
Western  China  was  to  the  great  missionary  societies 
who  first  sent  evangelists  there. 

There  must  have  been  some  moving  cause  to 
make  the  overloaded  Pope  take  so  much  interest 
and  show  so  much  solicitude  in  Christianising  the 
pagan  parts  of  Britain.  It  has  been  suggested, 
but  the  notion  seems  to  me  very  far-fetched,  that 
the  idea  was  first  communicated  to  him  by  his 
friend  Eulogius,  the  Patriarch  of  Alexandria. 
This  view  is  based  on  a  sentence  or  two  in  a 
letter  written  by  Gregory  to  the  latter  in  July  598, 
in  which    he    says    that,  while    the    nation   of  the 


6         SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Anglians  still  continued  to  worship  sticks  and 
stones,  he  had  determined,  through  the  aid  of  the 
prayers  of  Eulogius,  to  send  them  a  monk  of  his 
monastery.  His  actual  words  are  :  Exvestrae  mihi 
orationis  adjutorio  placuit,  etc.  Later  on  in  the 
letter,  Gregory,  having  reported  the  success  of  the 
mission,  says  that  he  had  sent  Eulogius  the  news,  to 
let  him  know  some  results  of  what  he  was  doing  "  at 
Alexandria  by  his  acts,  and  at  the  end  of  the  world 
by  his  prayers  "  [quid  in  mundi finibus  agitis  orando)} 

These  cryptic  sentences  are  assuredly  an  un- 
steady peg  to  hang  such  a  big  conclusion  upon, 
as  that  it  was  Eulogius  who  persuaded  Gregory 
to  his  famous  missionary  work. 

Another  suggestion  has  been  made  which 
seems  more  plausible.  We  know  from  a  letter 
which  Gregory  wrote  to  his  agent  in  Gaul,  the 
priest  Candidus,  in  September  595,  that  he  had 
then  heard  of  the  traffic  in  Anglian  boys ;  doubt- 
less prisoners  taken  in  the  fierce  wars  of  the 
different  tribes.  In  the  letter  the  Pope  bids 
Candidus  spend  the  money  he  had  collected  from 
the  patrimony  of  St.  Peter  in  Gaul  in  buying 
clothing  for  the  poor  and  in  redeeming  Anglian 
youths  of  the  age  of  from  seventeen  to  eighteen,  who, 
he  suggests,  might  profit  by  being  given  to  God  in 
monasteries.  He  urges  this  course  since,  as  the 
money  collected  in  Gaul  could  not  be  spent  in  Italy 
[i.e.  because  it  was  of  light  weight),  it  might  be 
profitably  spent  there.     He  further  told  him  that 

*  E.  and  H.  viii.  29  ;  Barmby,  viii.  30. 


THE  REASON  FOR  THE  ENGLISH  MISSION     7 

if  he  should  succeed  in  getting  any  of  the  ablatae 
{i.e.  arrears  of  rent),  he  was  to  spend  them  in 
the  same  way.  Inasmuch  as  the  boys  in  question 
would  be  pagans,  the  Pope  wished  a  priest  to  be 
sent  to  Rome  with  them,  so  that  if  any  were  sick 
and  about  to  die  on  the  way  he  might  baptize 
them.  He  thus  seems  to  suggest  that  except  in 
cases  of  necessity  his  agent  was  not  to  baptize 
the  boys,  but  to  reserve  them  for  himself,  and  he 
bade  nim  lose  no  time  in  prosecuting  his  com- 
mission diligently.^ 

This  notice  is  particularly  interesting,  for  it 
shows  that  when  it  was  written,  Gregory  was 
fully  aware  of  the  abominable  traffic  of  which 
the  Jews  then  had  the  monopoly,  and  in  which 
the  children  captured  in  war  were  publicly  or 
privately  sold  to  become  slaves  or  for  baser 
purposes.  It  is  clear,  also,  that  he  had  in  con- 
templation making  a  certain  number  of  them  into 
monks,  probably  in  order  that  they  should  become 
missionaries  ;  and  further,  that  he  had  ordered  some 
of  them  to  be  sent  to  Rome  that  he  might  him- 
self baptize  them,  and  it  is  almost  certain  that  he 
actually  saw  and  conversed  with  them. 

The  extent  of  the  nefarious  traffic  here  named 
is  hardly  sufficiently  appreciated,  and  a  few 
references  may  be  profitable.  Eusebius,  in  his 
Life  of  Constantine^  tells  us  that  that  emperor 
had  passed  a  law  forbidding  Jews  to  have 
Christian  slaves,  and   ordering   them   to   be  freed 

*  E.  and  H.  vi.  10  ;  Barmby,  vi.  7.  "  iv.  27. 


8         SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

when  they  did  so.  A  similar  provision  is  contained 
in  Justinian's  Code.^  Gregory  himself  refers  to 
Jewish  traders  in  slaves  in  several  of  his  letters. 
In  one^  he  forbids  Jews  holding  Christian  slaves 
[Eis  ta77ien  Christiana  7nancipia  habere  non  liceat). 
In  another,^  written  to  the  Praetor  of  Sicily,  Liber- 
tinus,  he  complains  of  a  Jew  called  Nasas  who 
had  acquired  Christian  slaves  and  devoted  them  to 
his  own  service  and  use,  and  ought  to  have  been 
punished  accordingly,  and  he  now  bids  his  agent 
punish  this  most  wicked  of  Jews  {quidam  scelerat- 
issirnus  Judeoruni),  and  compel  him  to  set  at 
liberty,  without  any  equivocation  whatever,  the 
Christian  slaves  he  had  acquired. 

In  a  third  letter,^  written  to  Bishop  Januarlus, 
Gregory  complains  that  male  and  female  slaves 
who  had  fled  to  the  Church  from  Jewish  masters 
for  the  sake  of  the  faith  {fidei  causa),  had  been 
restored  to  them  or  paid  for  according  to  their 
market  value ;  such  payments  he  denounced  as 
causing  the  poor  to  suffer  by  improper  spending  of 
money  by  the  patronage  of  ecclesiastical  compassion 
{ecclesiasticae  pie  talis). 

^  Lib.  i.  tit.  9,  lo  :  '''' Judaeus  servum  Christlanum  nee  comparare 
debebit,  nee  largitatis  aut  aliqiiocunque  titulo  eonseqiietur.  Quod  si 
aliquis  Judaeorutn  .  .  .  non  solum  mancipii  damno  ntulteiur,  verum 
etiatn  eapitali  sententia  puniatur.  .  .  .  Ne  Christianum  mancipium 
haereticus  vel  paganus  vel  Judaeus  habeat  vel  possideat  vel  cir- 
cumcidatP  Again,  in  the  Visigothic  laws  of  King  Reccared, 
xi.  2.  12,  we  read:  '"'•  Nulli  Judaeo  liceat  Christianum  mancipium 
comparare  nee  donatutn  accipere  .  .  .  servus  vero  vel  ancilla,  qui 
contradixerint  esse  Judaei,  ad  libertatem  perducanturP  E.  and  H. 
vii.  21,  note. 

*  lb.  ii.  6.  3  7^.  iii  27.  *  lb.  iv.  9. 


JEWISH  TRAFFIC  IN  CHRISTIAN  SLAVES     9 

In  a  fourth^  the  Pope  complains  that  in  the  city 
of  Luna  many  Christians  were  in  servitude  to  Jews, 
and  he  bids  the  bishop  have  them  released,  unless 
they  were  husbandmen  who  were  tenants  of  Jews 
and  had  become  such  by  conditions  of  their  tenure  ; 
which  seems  an  inconsequent  exception. 

In  a  fifth ^  he  urges,  that  if  any  slave  of  a 
Jew,  whether  Jew  or  pagan,  wished  to  become  a 
Christian,  the  Jew  was  not  to  be  permitted  to  sell 
him.  In  cases  where  pagans  had  been  brought 
from  foreign  parts  for  sale,  the  Jew  might  have 
three  months'  grace  in  which  to  find  a  purchaser, 
who  must  be  a  Christian.  After  that  he  was 
not  to  be  permitted  to  sell  him,  but  he  was  to 
be  unreservedly  released. 

In  a  sixth ^  Gregory  writes  to  Candidus,  his 
agent  in  Gaul,  to  say  that  a  certain  Dominicus  had 
complained  to  him  that  four  of  his  brothers  were 
detained  by  the  Jews  as  slaves  at  Narbonne. 

In  a  seventh,*  written  to  F'ortunatus,  Bishop  of 
Naples,  Gregory  speaks  of  Christian  slaves  whom 
Jews  bought  from  the  territories  of  Gaul,  and  on 
whose  behalf  the  bishop  had  acted  with  solicitude, 
and  he  declares  that  such  traffic  should  be  for- 
bidden. The  Pope  says,  however,  that  he  had 
been  embarrassed  by  the  decisions  of  the  secular 
judges,  who  had  decided  the  traffic  to  be 
legal  in  the  case  both  of  Christians  and  pagans 
{co7nperi7nus  hanc  illis  a  diversis  judicibus  7'eipublicae 

^  E.  and  H.'w.ii.  ^  lb.  vi.  29. 

*  lb.  vii.  21.  ^  lb.  ix.  104. 


lo       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

emptionem  injungi  atque  evenire  ut  inter  paganos 
et  Ckristiani  pariter  comparentur).  It  would  seem 
that  Jews  used  to  make  journeys  to  Gaul  to  buy 
slaves,  for  whom  they  had  orders.  The  Pope 
enjoins  that  all  slaves  who  were  in  their  hands  must 
be  handed  over  to  those  who  ordered  them,  or  be 
sold  to  Christian  purchasers,  within  forty  days,  or 
be  released.  If  such  slaves  should  fall  sick,  the 
time  of  their  release  must  be  postponed  till  they 
were  well.  If,  however,  some  such  slaves  should 
still  remain  in  their  hands  from  the  previous  year, 
before  the  Jews  knew  of  the  inhibition,  they  were 
to  be  permitted  to  sell  them  to  Christian  purchasers 
even  if  the  bishop  had  taken  possession  of  them. 

In  the  eighth  and  ninth  letters,^  Gregory,  writing 
to  Brunichildis,  the  Queen  of  the  Franks,  and  her 
grandsons,  complains  that  they  had  allowed  Jews 
to  possess  Christian  slaves  in  their  dominions. 

Lastly,  we  have  a  letter'  in  which  a  "Samarean  " 
{i.e.  doubtless  a  Samaritan)  had  a  Christian  slave 
who  had  been  given  to  him  by  his  Christian  master, 
which  the  Pope  denounces  as  not  only  wicked  but 
illegal. 

It  is  therefore  quite  plain  that  in  the  time  of 
Gregory  Anglian  slaves  were  being  sold  in  Gaul  and 
in  Italy,  and  that  some  of  them  had  actually  been 
redeemed  by  order  of  the  Pope  and  with  the  Church's 
funds,  and  had  been  sent  on  to  Rome.  It  is  pro- 
bably on  this  foundation  that  the  pretty  story  to 
which  I  will  now  turn  was  built. 

^  E.  and  H.  ix.  213  and  315.  ^  lb.  viii.  31. 


THE  STORY  OF  THE  ANGLIAN  SLAVES      ii 

•  The  Whitby  Monk  tells  us  it  was  reported 
among  the  faithful  that  before  Gregory  became 
Pope  there  arrived  at  Rome  certain  "  of  our  nation," 
having  fair  complexions  and  flaxen  hair  {crinibus 
candidate  albis).  When  he  heard  of  this,  Gregory 
desired  to  see  them.  Being  attracted  by  the 
appearance  of  the  boys,  he  asked  of  what  nation 
they  were,  to  which  they  replied  they  were  ''Anguli' 
{i.e.  Anglians),  and  he  remarked,  ''Angeli  Dei'  {i.e. 
angels  of  God).  He  then  asked  what  was  the 
name  of  the  king  of  their  nation.  They  said, 
"y4^//z,"and  he  replied,  '' Alleluja,  laus  enim  Dei 
esse  debet  illic''  {i.e.  Alleluja,  the  praise  of  God 
should  be  heard  there).  Lastly,  he  asked  to  what 
tribe  they  belonged,  to  which  they  said,  '' Deire^' 
and  he  answered,  ''  De  ira  Dei  confugientes  ad 
fident "  (they  have  fled  from  the  wrath  of  God  to 
the  faith). 

He  thereupon  asked  Pope  Benedict  to  be  allowed 
to  set  out  hither  {hue.  showing  that  the  tract  was 
written  in  England),  for  it  was  a  sorry  matter  that 
the  devil  should  fill  such  fine  vessels.  The  Pope 
gave  his  consent,  whereupon  there  was  a  tumult  at 
Rome.  The  crowd  divided  into  three  sections,  and 
waylaid  the  Pope  on  his  way  to  St.  Peter's  Church. 
The  three  sections  cried  out  respectively,  ''  Petrum 
offendisti;  Romam  detruxisti;  Gregoriam  dimisisti  " 
(Thou  hast  off"ended  Peter ;  thou  hast  destroyed 
Rome  ;  thou  hast  sent  Gregory  away).  He  accord- 
ingly sent  messengers  to  recall  the  would-be 
missionary.     Before  his  return,  and  when  he  was 


12       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

three  days'  journey  from  the  city,  Gregory  noticed 
that  a  locust  settled  on  his  book.  This  he  accepted 
as  an  omen  meaning  that  he  was  to  stay  where  he 
was  {in  loco  sia),  a  rather  ingenious  pun.  He  ac- 
cordingly returned  again  to  Rome.^ 

Our  author,  it  will  be  seen,  puts  the  incident  in 
the  reign  of  Pope  Benedict  the  First,  when  Gregory 
was  Prsefect  at  Rome,  and  therefore  an  officer  of 
the  Emperor  and  was  not  yet  subject  to  the  Pope's 
authority.  This  raises  our  doubts  about  the  matter. 
Such  doubts  probably  occurred  to  Paul  the  Deacon, 
who,  in  transferring  the  story  to  his  own  biography, 
attributes  it  to  the  reign  of  Pope  Pelagius.  If 
so,  it  must  relate  to  an  event  after  Gregory's 
return  from  Constantinople.  It  has  been  said  as 
a  reason  for  disbelieving  the  saga,  that  the  habit 
of  punning  in  the  way  it  occurs  in  the  story,  is  not 
found  in  Gregory's  writings,  although  he  was  very 
fond  of  joking.  More  than  one  pun,  however,  may 
be  found  in  his  letters. 

That  the  story  was  older  than  the  Whitby 
Monk's  life  seems  probable.  It  is  hardly  likely 
that  Paul  the  Deacon  would  have  had  access  to 
the  latter,  and  the  fact  that  he  attributes  the  event 
to  the  reign  of  Pelagius  and  not  to  that  of  Benedict, 
while  he  adds  a  fourth  phrase  to  those  alleged  to 
have  been  used  by  the  crowd  to  the  Pope,  namely, 
regnu77i  non  tarn  dimisisti,  points  to  another 
source.  Bede  also  tells  the  story  in  another  fashion, 
and  I  cannot  agree  with  Ewald  and  Hartmann  that 
*  Op.  cit.  ed.  Gasquet,  13-15. 


THE  STORY  OF  THE  ANGLIAN  BOYS       13 

he  derived  it  from  the  Whitby  Monk  and  not  from 
an  independent  tradition.  The  view  that  Bede  and 
Thorn,  the  Canterbury  chronicler,  both  derived  the 
story  from  an  independent  source  is  also  urged  by 
Mason. ^  Bede,  in  telling  this  story,  speaks  of  it  as 
a  tradition  {opinio)  about  the  blessed  Gregory  which 
had  been  handed  down  from  the  ancients.  This 
hardly  points  to  his  having  been  inspired  by  some 
one  who  was,  like  the  Whitby  Monk,  almost  a  con- 
temporary. In  his  hands  the  tale  has  considerably 
grown.  The  boys  have  become  slaves  who  were 
being  sold  {vidisse  .  .  .  pueros  venales)  in  the  forum 
or  market-place  by  certain  merchants,  and  who 
were  seen  by  Gregory  while  passing,  and  it  was 
before  making  his  punning  allusions  that  he  first 
learnt  that  they  came  from  Britain  and  were 
pagans.^  The  Canterbury  monk.  Thorn,  reports 
a  tradition  that  the  boys  were  three  in  number. 

In  a  Saxon  homily  on  St.  Gregory^  it  is  said 
that  the  merchants  who  sold  the  boys  were  them- 
selves Anglians,  which  can  only  mean  that  it  was 
Englishmen  who  had  disposed  of  them  to  the 
slave-dealers  of  the  period.  These  variations  in 
the  reports  seem  to  make  it  probable  that  all  the 
narratives  we  have,  came  from  some  common 
original,  possibly  some  tradition  which  existed  at 
Canterbury,  which  was  possibly  also  the  source 
of  some  of  the  miracles  as  told  by  the  Whitby 
Monk,  Bede,  and  Paul  the  Deacon.     The  one  fact 

^  The  Mission  of  Augustine^  188. 

*  Op.  cit.  ii.  1.  3  See  Elstob,  11-18. 


14      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

which  remains  certain  (based  as  it  is  on  the  state- 
ment of  Gregory  himself)  is  that  he  knew  of  the 
traffic  in  EngHsh  slave-boys  at  this  time,  and  had 
probably  personally  encountered  some  of  them. 

To  return  to  the  motive  which  moved  Gregory 
to  send  his  mission,  the  most  reasonable  is  the  one 
he  gives  himself,  when  he  tells  us  in  a  letter  to 
Queen  Brunichildis,  dated  in  July  596,  that  there 
had  gone  to  him  some  of  the  Anglian  people  who 
wished  to  become  Christians,  but  the  bishops  who 
were  in  the  vicinity  (which  has  been  understood 
as  referring  to  Gaul)  had  shown  no  solicitude  for 
them  {sed  sacerdotes  qui  in  vicino  sunt  pastoralem 
erga  eos  sollicitudine7n  non  habere)}  Gregory  goes 
on  to  say  that,  not  wishing  to  be  responsible  for 
their  eternal  damnation,  he  had  sent  Augustine 
and  his  companions  to  learn  their  wishes  and  to 
try  and  convert  them.  This  is  quite  explicit  and 
clear. 

One  curious  feature  about  these  notices,  which 
is  true  of  all  the  occasions  on  which  Gregory  refers 
to  the  English  race,  is  that  he  always  refers  to  them 
as  Anglians,  and  never  as  Saxons.  This  confirms 
the  evidence  of  the  story  about  the  Anglian  boys, 
in  which  they  are  made  to  state  that  their  king  was 
called  Aelli  and  their  country  Deira,  and  points  to 
the  boys  thus  sold  as  slaves  in  Gaul  having  come 
from  North  Britain,  and  been  probably  the  victims 
of  some  war  between  Northumbria  and  Kent. 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  57.     Sacerdos  is  the  usual  word  employed  by 
Gregory  for  a  bishop. 


THE  CAELIAN  HILL  AND  NEIGHBOURHOOD    1 5 

When  Gregory  had  made  up  his  mind  to  send 
a  mission  to  evangelise  the  Anglians,  he  also 
determined  that  it  should  consist  not  of  secular 
priests  but  of  monks,  and  further,  that  they  should 
be  chosen  from  his  own  children — the  inmates  of 
his  own  foundation,  St.  Andrew's  Monastery,  on 
the  Caelian  Hill. 

There  are  few  educated  English  people  who 
visit  Rome  who  do  not  pay  a  visit  to  the  Church 
of  St.  Gregorio.  On  their  way  thither  they  for  the 
most  part  pass  under  the  stately  Arch  of  Constantine, 
who,  in  making  Christianity  the  official  religion  of 
the  State,  did  so  much  to  encourage  its  growth  and 
prosperity.  Close  by  the  arch  stands  the  Colosseum, 
with  its  riven  walls,  its  vast  proportions,  its  massive 
and  grandiose  style.  There,  in  the  evening,  as  the 
wind  whistles  through  the  gaps  in  the  walls,  we 
seem  to  hear  echoes  of  the  awful  human  cries  with 
which  dying  gladiators  and  slaughtered  martyrs  for 
centuries  pierced  the  skies  amidst  the  plaudits  of 
the  cruel,  savage,  heartless  Roman  mob  that  filled 
the  benches.  By  the  same  way  Gregory  when 
young  must  have  gone  well-nigh  daily  for  years 
as  he  passed  along  the  Via  de  San  Gregorio,  now 
shaded  with  trees  on  either  side,  until  at  the  farther 
end  he  turned  up  the  gentle  slope  to  the  left  which 
was  known  in  ancient  days  as  the  Clivus  Scauri, 
answering  to  the  modern  Via  de  SS.  Giovanni  e 
Paolo,  where  his  home  was  planted  on  the  slopes 
of  the  Caelian  Hill. 

The  Caelian  Hill  was  in  later  Roman  times  the 


1 6       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

favourite  residence  of  some  of  the  wealthier  Roman 
families,  and  among  others  of  Pope  Agapetus  (535- 
537).  His  father,  Gordian,  had  been  the  priest  of 
the  Church  of  SS.  Giovanni  e  Paolo  on  the  same 
slope.  Agapetus  himself  had  been  an  archdeacon 
before  he  became  Pope ;  he  was  a  personage  of 
senatorial  rank,  and  had  his  palace  close  by  the 
church  just  named,  and  near  that  of  the  family  of 
his  successor  Gregory.  He  was  a  man  of  culture 
and  a  friend  of  Cassiodorus,  and  with  him  he  tried 
to  found  a  university  at  Rome,  but  the  times  were 
not  propitious.  In  his  palace  Agapetus  placed  a 
library,  and  the  dedicatory  inscription  still  exists. 
This  house  eventually  passed  into  the  possession  of 
Gregory,  and  from  him  into  that  of  his  monastery.-^ 
Under  the  present  buildings  of  the  monastery  are 
buried  vast  constructions,  including  the  remains  of 
the  library  of  Agapetus,  which  was  lighted  by  large 
windows.  These  foundations  rest  on  great  walls 
of  the  early  Republic  of  the  kind  known  as  opus 
quadratum. 

As  we  have  seen,  when  Gregory  succeeded  to 
the  family  house  in  Rome,  he  dedicated  it,  with 
all  its  appurtenances,  to  religious  uses,  and  founded 
on  its  site  a  monastery  under  the  patronage  of 
St.  Andrew,  after  whom  it  was  named. 

This  house  where  Gregory  was  born  and  lived 
for  years,  stood  right  in  face  of  the  Palatine  Hill, 
•*  that  Arx  imperii,  covered  with  its  thickly  clustering 
palaces  and  haunted  by  strange  memories  of  many 

^  Grisar,  op.  cit.  pp.  502,  529. 


THE  PALATINE  IN  SAINT  GREGORY'S  TIME    1 7 

emperors.  Viewed  from  without,  the  stately  buildings 
of  the  Palatine  were  still  magnificent.  Valentinian 
the  Third  had  put  them  in  repair,  and  the  havoc  of 
Goths  and  Vandals  had  made  but  slight  impression 
on  their  solid  structures.  Within,  however,  was 
one  vast  desolation — a  wilderness  of  empty  courts 
and  closed  apartments,  choked  with  rubbish  and 
strewn  with  the  fragments  of  broken  ornaments  and 
statuary.  It  is  true  that  portions  of  these  build- 
ings were  still  in  use.  _Theod or ic  stayed  in  the 
Imperial  Palace  in  the  year  500 ;  and,  after  Rome 
was  restored  to  the  Empire,  a  few  officials  had 
their  residence  there.  But  a  mere  corner  of  the 
Palatine  must  have  sufficed  to  house  the  handful 
of  Imperial  agents,  and  to  provide  an  official 
Roman  residence  for  the  governor  of  Ravenna. 
The  rest  of  the  buildings,  with  their  halls,  baths, 
galleries,  stairways,  and  innumerable  apartments, 
were  abandoned  to  decay,  and  in  their  fading 
splendour  served  but  to  remind  men  of  the 
brilliant  life  that  had  for  ever  passed  away.  .  .  . 
"  Even  now,  when  on  some  mild  spring  morning," 
continues  Mr.  Dudden,  "we  take  our  stand  on  the 
steps  of  St.  Gregorio,  and  gaze  across  St.  Gregory's 
Avenue  towards  the  grassy  ruins  of  the  Palatine,  the 
spell  of  antiquity  is  strong  upon  us,  and  the  soul  is 
stirred  with  a  wonderful  admiration  of  vanished 
things.  What,  then,  must  have  been  Gregory's 
feelings  when,  in  the  last  years  of  the  classical 
age,  he  raised  his  eyes  to  the  yet  abiding 
mansions  of  the  Caesars,  or  rambled  through  the 


1 8       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

ample  spaces  of  the  circus,  or  watched,  from  some 
gallery  of  the  Flavian  Amphitheatre,  the  sunshine 
playing  on  the  bronze  of  Nero's  colossal  statue  ?  It 
cannot  be  doubted  that  amid  these  historic  places 
there  was  engendered  in  him  that  ardent  patriotism 
and  pride  in  the  Roman  race  and  name  for  which 
throughout  his  later  life  he  was  distinguished."^ 

A  good  deal  of  rhetoric  has  been  spent  in 
regard  to  St.  Gregory's  Monastery  as  it  stands, 
and  the  ties  between  it  and  our  history.  The  fact 
is  that  few  such  memorable  institutions  have  had  so 
many  vicissitudes.  Its  dedication  was  changed  not 
unfittingly  from  St.  Andrew  to  St.  Gregory,  and  it 
passed  presently  out  of  the  hands  of  its  original 
tenants  and  became  the  home  for  a  while  of  certain 
Greek  monks,  and  in  1573  it  was  transferred  to  the 
monks  of  Camaldolese,""an31)ecame  the  headquarters 
of  their  order. 

The  cloistered  court,  or  atrium,  which  forms  the 
main  entrance  to  the  church  and  looks  so  old,  was 
really  only  built  in  1633  by  the  architect  Soria, 
and  at  the  instance  of  Cardinal  Scipio  Borghesi, 
while  the  church  itself  was  largely  rebuilt  in  17M, 
under  Francesco  Ferrari,  so  that  neither  the 
church  nor  the  convent  in  their  present  shape  and 
appearance  recall  in  any  way  the  monastic  buildings 
as  they  existed  in  the  time  of  St.  Gregory.  What 
there  is  of  the  old  buildings  themselves  is,  as  I 
have  said,  chiefly  underground. 

Remains  of  the  church  built  by   Gregory  are, 

^  Dudden,  op.  cit.  i.  ii,  15. 


s 


r; 


/•ji; 


The  Marble  Throne  of  St.  Gregory. 


To /ace  p.  18. 


THE  REMAINS  OF  ST.  ANDREW'S  CHURCH     19 

however,  incorporated  in  the  present  one,  notably 
its  sixteen  granite  columns,  which,  like  so  many 
others  in  the  churches  of  Rome,  were  the  spoils  of 
ancient  temples  or  other  Roman  buildings.  Bishop  '^ 
Brown  tells  us  he  "found  in  the  steps  up  to  the 
altar  in  the  north  aisle  a  piece  of  sculpture  which 
had  evidently  formed  part  of  one  of  the  sculptured 
screens  of  the  enclosed  choir  of  the  basilica ;  a 
remarkably  fine  example  of  the  imitation  of  bronze 
screens,  in  marble,  and  of  a  rare  design,  and  in 
the  garden  on  the  north  side,  used  as  the  riser  of  a 
step,  one  of  the  grooved  and  sculptured  marble  posts 
which  held  the  slabs  of  the  choir  screens."  "These," 
he  adds,  "  we  cannot  well  doubt,  are  relics  of 
Gregory's  own  church  as  built  by  himself,  evidences/ 
of  the  style  in  which  he  built  ;  decorative  structure 
on  which  his  eye,  perhaps  his  hand,  has  rested."^ 

In  a  small  chapel  attached  to  that  specially 
dedicated  to  St.  Gregory,  is  still  a  marble  throne, 
or  chair  (of  which  I  give  a  figure),  alleged  with 
every  probability  to  have  been  his,  and  also  a 
recess  in  which  he  is  said  to  have  slept.  The 
former  is  described  by  Bishop  Brown.  He  says  of 
it :  "  The  magnificent  white  marble  throne  which 
is  shown  in  St.  Gregory's  Church  as  the  chair 
of  Pope  Gregory  himself,  is  one  of  the  beautiful 
thrones  of  Greek  sculpture  which  were  brought  to 
Rome  in  the  time  of  the  Empire,  and  served  as 
seats  for  the  vestals  and  other  chief  personages  in 
the  Colosseum  and  elsewhere,  and  they  have  found 

^  Augustine  and  His  Companions^  141,  142. 


20      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

their  way  to  various  parts  of  Rome,  but  nowhere 
is  there  one  so  fine,  I  think,  as  this.  Its  beauty 
of  sculptured  relief  is  not  seen  at  all,  unless  you 
get  it  removed  from  its  position  so  as  to  see  the 
back.  The  rubbing  which  they  allowed  me  to 
take  of  it  shows  a  very  fine  piece  of  symmetrical 
decoration  of  the  best  type,  when  laid  out  flat."  ^     ^y 

In  this  church,  perhaps  (no  doubt  very  dear  to 
him  in  every  way),  St.  Wilfred  when  in  Rome  saw 
on  the  high  altar  a  beautifully  ornamented  text 
of  the  Gospels  which  had  been  presented  by  the 
Pope.  His  biographer  tells  us  it  was  in  the  Church 
of  St.  Andrew,  and  he  almost  certainly  meant  this 
Church  of  St.  Andrew. 

In  the  atrium  of  the  present  church  have  been 
inserted  a  number  of  tablets  also  removed  from 
the  earlier  one,  among  which  are  two  or  three 
which  recall  our  English  troubles  of  a  much  later 
date.  One  of  them  may  be  quoted  as  an  example  of 
quaint  pathos.  It  reads  thus  :  "  Here  lies  Robert 
Pecham,  an  English  Catholic,  who,  after  the  dis- 
ruption of  England  and  the  Church,  quitted  his 
country,  unable  to  endure  life  there  without  the 
faith ;  and  who,  coming  to  Rome,  died,  unable  to 
endure  life  here  without  his  country." 

Another  monument  commemorates  Sir  Edward 
Carne  of  Glamorganshire,  D.C.L.  of  Oxford,  who 
formed  with  Cranmer  and  others  the  Commission 
that  sought  an  opinion  from  the  foreign  Universities 
in  favour  of  Henry  viii.'s  divorce.     He  was  after- 

^  Augustine  and  His  Companions,  142. 


ST.   ANDREW'S  MONASTERY  21 

wards  Ambassador  to  the  Emperor  Charles  the 
Fifth,  by  whom  he  was  knighted,  and  became  envoy 
to  the  Roman  Court,  where  he  died  in  1561. 

To  the  left  of  the  staircase  leading  up  to  the 
monastery,  three  small  chapels  stand  apart  on  a 
plot  of  grass,  which,  although  restored  in  later 
times  by  Cardinal  Baronius,  have  a  greater  claim 
than  the  present  church  to  be  closely  connected 
with  St.  Gregory.  One  is  dedicated  to  Santa 
Silvia,  Gregory's  mother.  It  contains  a  very  fine 
modern  statue  of  the  Saint.  This  latter  is 
figured  in  the  frontispiece  to  the  previous  work 
on  Gregory.  A  second  chapel  was  dedicated  by 
Gregory  himself  to  St.  Andrew ;  while  the  third 
is  dedicated  to  Santa  Barbara,  and  on  the  portal 
is  the  inscription  Triclinium  Pauperum.  In  the 
centre  of  this  chapel  is  a  marble  table,  1 1  feet 
long  and  3  broad,  "  set  on  classical  supports  much 
resembling  in  style  Pope  Gregory's  chair."  The 
inscription  on  it  tells  us  that  St,  Gregory  fed  twelve 
paupers  every  morning  at  this  table.  A  pretty 
legend  attaches  to  the  story,  namely,  that  on  one 
occasion  Christ  Himself  in  the  form  of  an  angel 
took  His  seat  at  the  table  as  the  thirteenth  guest. 
For  this  reason  the  Pope  on  Maundy  Thursday 
used  to  wait  on  thirteen  guests  instead  of  twelve. 
The  inscription  on  it  reads  : — 

*'  Bis  senos  Gregorius  hie  pascebat  egentes 
Angelus  et  decimus  tertius  occubuit."^ 

*  Augustine  mid  His  Companions^  143,  note.     The  table  is  also 
figured  in  the  previous  volume. 


2  2      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

We  may  be  sceptical  about  the  pedigree  of  some 
of  the  things  here  mentioned  which  have  been 
associated  with  Gregory's  name,  but  this  will  not 
detract  from  the  fact  that  wherever  we  turn  in 
this  hallowed  corner  of  the  most  secluded  and 
silent  part  of  Rome,  the  great  Pope  is  the  genius 
of  the  place,  nor  can  we  fail  to  feel  a  certain 
glow  of  sentiment  as  we  mount  the  stately  stairs 
leading  up  to  the  monastery,  and  remember  that 
it  was  possibly  down  these  very  steps  that  the 
monks  came  as  they  set  out  on  their  English 
mission. 

The  Monastery  of  St.  Andrew's  and  its  inmates 
are  mentioned  in  several  of  Gregory's  letters,  and 
notably  in  one  written  in  February  60 1  to  the 
patrician  lady,  Rusticiana,  at  Constantinople,  who 
had  sent  some  alms  to  the  monastery  in  question. 
In  this,  Gregory  tells  us  of  such  miracles  having 
been  performed  there,  that  it  might  have  been  the 
Apostle  Peter  who  was  its  abbot.  He  mentions 
some  which  he  had  heard  of  from  the  abbot  and 
prior.  Thus,  two  of  the  brethren,  one  old  and  one 
young,  went  out  one  day  to  buy  something  for 
the  use  of  the  monastery,  when  the  elder  monk, 
who  had  been  sent  as  the  guardian  of  the  younger, 
appropriated  some  of  the  money  given  to  him  for 
the  purchase.  When  they  in  returning  had  reached 
the  threshold  of  "the  oratory,"  the  thief  fell  down, 
having  been  seized  by  a  demon.  When  charged 
by  the  monks  with  theft,  he  denied  it.  He  was 
again    seized,  and  this  was    repeated  eight  times, 


THE  MONKS  AT  ST.  ANDREW'S  23 

when  he  confessed,  and  thereupon  the  devil  came 
to  him  no  more. 

On  another  occasion,  on  the  anniversary  of 
St.  Peter,  while  the  brethren  were  resting  at  mid- 
day, one  of  them  became  blind,  although  his  eyes 
were  open,  uttered  loud  cries,'  and  trembled.  His 
companions  took  him  up  and  carried  him  to  the 
altar  of  St.  Andrew,  where  they  all  prayed,  when 
he  recovered.  He  then  told  them  that  an  old  man 
came  to  him  and  set  a  black  dog  at  him  to  tear 
him,  and  asked  him  what  had  induced  him  to 
escape  from  the  monastery,  and  he  confessed  that 
that  very  day  it  had  been  his  intention  to  run 
away. 

Another  monk  also  desired  to  escape.  He  was 
very  sorely  treated  by  a  demon  every  time  he 
entered  the  oratory,  while  he  did  not  molest  him 
when  he  was  outside.  He  at  length  confessed  to 
the  brethren,  who  prayed  for  him  for  three  days, 
when  the  demon  ceased  from  molesting  him. 

On  another  occasion,  two  other  brethren  fled 
from  the  monastery.  They  had  previously  hinted 
to  the  others  that  they  were  going  down  the  Appian 
or  Latin  Way  to  make  for  Jerusalem,  but,  having 
gone  some  distance  they  turned  aside,  and,  finding 
some  retired  crypts  near  the  Flaminian  Road,  they 
hid  there.  When  they  were  missed,  some  of  the 
monks  followed  them  on  horseback  by  the  Metrovian 
Gate.  As  their  horses  reached  the  crypts  where 
the  fugitives  were  hiding,  they  stood  still,  though 
beaten  and  urged  to  proceed.     Surprised  at  this, 


24      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

their  riders  searched  the  crypts,  and  noticed  that 
the  entrance  was  closed  by  a  heap  of  stones. 
Having  dismounted  and  removed  them,  they  found 
the  fugitives,  who  were  much  frightened.  This 
"miracle"  so  acted  on  them  that  they  were  greatly 
impressed,  and  returned.  Thus,  says  the  Pope,  it 
really  proved  a  great  advantage  to  them  to  have 
escaped  for  a  short  time  from  the  monastery. 
Gregory  adds  that  he  had  sent  these  stories  so 
that  the  great  lady  might  know  more  about  the 
"  oratory  "  on  which  she  had  bestowed  her  alms.^ 

They  are  interesting  to  us  as  a  sample  of  the 
modes  of  thinking  prevailing  on  some  subjects  in 
the  very  monastery  from  which  Augustine  and  his 
brethren  set  out,  and  whence,  at  this  time,  there 
seems,  further,  to  have  been  an  epidemic  to  try  and 
escape.  The  incident  of  a  number  of  monks  on 
horseback  pursuing  runaways  along  the  Appian 
Way  has  a  very  curious  local  colour. 

The  monks  in  question,  as  we  have  seen,  almost 
certainly  lived  under  a  slightly  modified  Rule  of 
St.  Benedict.  Their  first  abbot,  according  to  John 
the  Deacon,  was  Hilarion.^  He  is  nowhere  men- 
tioned in  the  works  of  Gregory.  Hilarion,  however, 
is  named  in  the  inscription  at  the  monastery  record- 
ing the  famous  men  who  were  once  monks  there, 
which  is  a  very  late  record.  The  Pope,  in  one  of 
his  Dialogues^  refers  to  a  certain  Valentio,  other- 
wise unknown,  of  whom  he  speaks  as  "■  mihi  sicut 
nostiy  nieo  que  mmasterio  praefuity     He  may  have 

^  E.  and  H,  xi.  26  ;  Barmby,  xi.  44.      '  Op.  cit.  i.  6,  7.       '  iv.  21. 


ii    CJ 


u 


SAINT  AUGUSTINE,  PRIOR  OF  ST.  ANDREWS    25 

been  the  same  person.  According  to  the  same  writer, 
Hilarion  was  succeeded  by  Maximian,  who  held 
office  till  591,  i.e.  the  year  after  Gregory  became 
Pope,  when  he  became  Archbishop  of  Syracuse.  He 
was  succeeded,  according  to  one  of  Gregory's  letters, 
by  Candidus,  who  is  styled  "the  Abbot  of  the 
Monastery  of  St.  Andrew  the  Apostle,  situated  in 
this  Roman  city  on  the  slope  of  Scaurus  {in  clivum 
Scaur i)."  This  letter  was  written  in  February  598.^ 
He  was  still  abbot  in  February  601.^ 

Candidus  before  he  was  abbot  had  been  a 
"  bearer  of  presents,"  ^  and  in  writing  to  John,  Bishop 
of  Syracuse,  to  whom  he  took  some  presents,  the 
Pope  speaks  of  him  as  homo  vester,  pointing  to 
his  having  been  a  Sicilian.*  He  also  styles  him 
Defensor.^ 

While  Candidus  was  Abbot  of  St.  Andrew's, 
the  prior  [praeposittis]^  was  named  Augustine.  It 
was  perhaps  not  his  real  name,  but  one  he  took 
when  he  became  a  monk,  and  was  doubtless 
adopted  from  a  much  greater  Augustine,  the 
famous  Bishop  of  Hippo.  He  was  the  person 
selected  by  Gregory  to  lead  his  Anglian  mission. 

In  a  letter  addressed  by  the  Pope  to  Syagrius, 


^  E.  and  H.  viii.  12. 

^  lb.  xi.  20.  He  must  be  distinguished  from  another  Candidus, 
who,  as  we  have  seen,  was  the  protector  of  the  papal  patrimony  in 
Gaul. 

^  Lator  praesentium,  i.e.  answering  to  a  modern  king's  messenger. 
lb.  vii.  9  ;  xi.  20. 

*  lb.  vii.  9.  "  lb.  iv.  28. 

*  The  word  was  often  vir\{{&r\  propositus,  whence  our  word  provost. 
Plummer's  Bede,  Intr.  xxviii,  note  5. 


26      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Bishop  of  Autun,  in  July  599,  he  specially  speaks 
of  Augustine  as  "  ioxva&rXy  praepo situs  of  my  monas- 
tery, now  our  brother  and  co-bishop,"  ^  while  in 
writing  a  fatherly  letter  to  the  missionary  monks 
he  was  sending  to  Britain,  he  tells  them  that  he 
puts  them  under  the  care  of  Augustine,  their  own 
praepositus,  who  he  proceeds  to  nominate  as  their 
abbot. ^  The  role  of  prior  or  praepositus  in  a 
monastery  was  one  upon  which  Pope  Gregory 
set  great  store,  and  in  one  of  his  letters  he  says 
that  an  abbot's  negligence  must  be  remedied  by 
means  of  a  vigilant  praepositus.  He  was  the 
abbot's  deputy  [secundus  ab  abbate  praepositi 
jureY  The  position  was  filled  at  this  time  at 
St.  Andrew's,  as  I  have  just  said,  by  Augustine. 
According  to  a  doubtful  letter  of  St.  Gregory's,  he 
had  been  a  pupil  {alumnus^  of  Felix,  Bishop  of 
Messina.  In  it  he  styles  him  "consodalis"  {i.e. 
mate  or  companion).*  This,  if  it  is  to  be  trusted, 
points  to  his  having  been,  like  his  abbot,  a  Sicilian  by 
race,  and  it  was  in  Sicily  that  Gregory,  as  we  have 
seen,  had  had  great  estates.^  According  to  another 
doubtful  letter  from  Pope  Vitalian  to  Archbishop 
Theodore,  he   had   been    syncellus,  or  companion, 

^  E.  and  H.  ix.  222  ;  Barmby,  ix.  108. 
'  E.  and  H.  vi.  50^. 

3  Archbishop  Ecgberth's  Dialogues  ;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  406 ; 
see  Plummer,  Bede,  Intr.  xxix,  note. 

*  See  Bright,  45,  note  6. 

*  He  also  had  a  brother  living  in  Sicily  whose  name  is  unknown, 
but  to  whom  he  had  commissioned  his  agent  Peter  to  pay  some  money, 
which  he  had  neglected  to  do  {E.  and  H.  i.  42  ;  Barmby,  i.  44).  In 
another  letter  he  refers  to  a  certain  Peter,  a  baker  or  miller  in  the 
employment  of  "  our  brother  "  {germani  nostri)  {E.  and  H.  ix.  200). 


DEPARTURE  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION  27 

in  the  cell  or  private  room,  to  Gregory.^  The 
same  statement  is  made  in  a  letter  from  Pope  Leo 
the  Third  to  the  Mercian  King  Kenulf,  which  is 
reported  by  William  of  Malmesbury.^ 

It  was  a  new  experiment  which  the  Pope  was 
making.  This  was  the  first  missionary  enterprise  on 
a  concerted  plan,  sent  out  by  the  head  of  the  Western 
Church  to  evangelise  a  nation.  Perhaps  it  was 
natural  that  he  should  trust  its  carrying  out  to  the 
class  of  men  whom  he  treated  as  the  real  deposi- 
tories of  the  Christian  ideal,  namely,  his  monks. 
It  is,  nevertheless,  strange  that  one  so  endowed  with 
worldly  wisdom  should  not  have  realised  that  the 
life  of  monks,  secluded  from  the  world  and  worldly 
affairs,  was  hardly  the  preparation  and  the  training 
to  make  them  the  best  capable  of  dealing  with  the 
difficult  problems  which  he  entrusted  to  them,  and 
it  is  especially  notable  that  he  should  have  put 
over  them  a  leader  who,  from  what  we  know  of  his 
after  career,  was  little  more  than  a  cloistered  monk, 
with  little  tact  and  with  scant  abilities,  and  that  he 
who  was  so  eminently  practical  should  not  have  put 
at  the  head  of  his  mission  some  business-like  person 
whose  life  had  been  more  passed  in  the  open,  and 
who  knew  the  ways  of  men. 

It  has  also  been  much  remarked  upon  that,  in 
sending  his  missionary  monks  to  found  a  new  branch 
of  the  Church,  Gregory  should  have  neglected  to 
send  a  bishop  with  them  to  perform  the  necessary 
duties  which  bishops  were  alone  deemed  capable  of 
^  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  116.  *  G.R.  i.  par.  89. 


28       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

performing,  or  that  he  did  not,  in  fact,  himself  con- 
secrate Augustine  as  a  missionary -bishop  before 
sending  him  on  such  a  distant  errand,  and  thus 
give  him  a  special  prestige.  It  may  be  that  the 
generally  prudent  Pope,  who  could  hardly  have 
foreseen  the  success  that  came  to  him,  contemplated 
a  possible  failure  and  treated  the  venture  as  more 
experimental  than  has  been  thought.  It  is  more 
curious  that  he  should  not  in  the  first  instance 
have  given  Augustine  and  his  monks  letters  of 
introduction  and  commendation  to  the  Prankish 
priests  and  bishops,  nor  given  them  any  written 
instructions. 

The  travellers  set  out  in  the  spring  of  596.^ 
It  is  pretty  certain  that  they  went  by  sea, 
setting  out  from  Ostia  and  making  for  Lerins,  for 
the  land  route  was  long  and  rough  and  perilous. 
It  was  natural  that  a  body  of  monks  on  their 
unaccustomed  journey  should  have  called  at  the 
Mecca  of  Western  monasticism,  and  probably  also 
at  this  time  the  most  learned  centre  of  theological 
learning  and  training  anywhere. 

The  island  of  Lerins  is  now  known  as  St. 
Honorat,  from  the  founder  of  its  famous  monastery. 
At  Lerins  the  missionaries  were  well  pleased  with 
their  visit,  for  we  find  the  Pope  afterwards  writing 
to  Stephen  the  Abbot,  congratulating  him  on  the 
report  which  he  had  received  from  Augustine  about 
the  regularity  and  unanimity  which  prevailed  there.^ 

^  Anno  xiiii.  ejusdem  principis  {i.e.  of  Maurice,  that  is,  during  the 
year  from  August  595  to  August  596)  ;  Bede,  i.  23. 
^  E.  and  H.  vi.  54  ;  Barmby,  vi.  56. 


MESSAGE  OF  THE  POPE  TO  MISSIONARIES     29 

From  Lerins  the  monks  probably  went  on  to  Mar- 
seilles, and  thence  to  Aix,  whose  bishop,  Protasius, 
was  also  well  reported  upon  by  Augustine.  The 
latter  also  spoke  favourably  of  the  Patrician  Arigius 
and  his  treatment  of  the  travellers.^  At  this  time,  as 
we  have  seen,  there  were  two  officials  with  the  style 
of  "  Patrician  "  in  the  kingdom  of  Burgundy,  one 
with  his  seat  at  Aries.  The  other  was  Arigius, 
just  named,  who  lived  at  Marseilles.  At  Aix  the 
missionaries  were  disconcerted  by  the  reports  they 
heard — "  the  offspring  of  the  tongues  of  evil-speak- 
ing men  " — about  the  dangers  of  the  way  and  the 
roughness  and  cruelty  of  the  people  among  whom 
they  were  going,  whose  manners  and  language 
they  did  not  understand,  and  who  were  pictured 
to  them  as  bloodthirsty  savages.  Their  hearts, 
in  fact,  failed  them.  As  Bede  plainly  puts  it, 
"  Struck  by  a  sluggish  fear  {timore  inerti),  they 
thouofht  it  better  to  return  home  than  to  face  the 
dangers  we  have  named,  and,  having  taken  counsel 
together,  they  determined  to  send  back  Augustine 
to  the  Pope  with  a  humble  prayer  that  he  would 
relieve  them  from  so  dangerous,  laborious,  and  un- 
certain a  journey."  They  were  clearly  not  formed 
of  the  stuff  of  which  missionary  martyrs  are  made, 
and  they  doubtless  longed  to  be  back  in  their 
delightful  seclusion  at  St.  Andrew's  Monastery. 
Augustine  accordingly  returned  to  Rome. 

The  Pope  was  made  of  much  more  masculine 
materials.     He  would  not  hear  of  their  giving  up 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  56 ;  Barmby,  vi.  57. 


30      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

their  enterprise,  and  wrote  them  a  soothing  letter, 
which  was  sent  back  by  Augustine.  A  copy  is 
preserved  by  Bede,  and  is  addressed  "to  the 
servants  of  our  Lord "  {servzs  Do77iini  nostri). 
It  afterwards  disappeared  from  the  papal  registers. 
It  reminded  them  of  the  adage  that  it  is  better 
not  to  begin  a  work  at  all  rather  than  to  give  it 
up  in  this  fashion.  They  should  not  be  deterred 
by  the  toil  of  the  journey,  nor  the  evil  speech  of 
men,  but  march  on  with  all  fervour  to  fulfil  their 
high  calling.  God  was  with  them,  and  the  greater 
their  labour,  the  greater  their  reward.  He,  then, 
constituted  their  former  prior,  Augustine,  as  their 
abbot  (thus  giving  him  greater  prestige),  bidding 
them  obey  him  in  all  things.  The  Pope  concludes 
with  a  phrase  Mr.  Bright  describes  as  really  quite 
Pauline,  and  in  which  he  expresses  the  hope  that 
"in  the  Eternal  country  he  might  see  the  fruit  of 
their  labours  and  share  in  their  reward,  as  he  had 
wished  to  share  their  work,  and  commends  them  to 
the  special  care  of  the  Almighty."  This  letter  was 
dated  23rd  July  596.^  It  was  apparently  efficacious, 
and  we  do  not  hear  of  any  more  talk  of  returning. 
On  the  same  day^  Augustine  again  set  out,  and 
this  time  was  fortified  with  letters  of  introduction 
to  the  Prankish  princes  and  bishops. 

In  rejoining  his  friends  in  Provence,  Augustine 
returned  by  way  of  Lerins,  and  was  the  bearer 
of  a  letter  to  its  abbot,  Stephen,  in  which  the  Pope 
congratulated  him  on  the  order  and  unity  prevailing 

'  E.  and  H.  vi.  50^.  ^  Bede,  i.  23. 


LETTERS  TO  THE  BISHOPS  OF  AIX  &  ARLES    3 1 

in  his  monastery,  and  which  was  full  of  kindly  and 
paternal  phrases.  It  concludes  by  thanking  him 
for  some  spoons  and  plates  (cocieares  et  circulos) 
which  Stephen  had  sent  him,  and  for  the  things 
he  had  also  sent  for  the  poor  of  Rome.^  These 
had  doubtless  been  taken  by  Augustine. 

Among  the  letters  of  commendation  given  to 
Augustine,  was  one  headed  "  Gregorius  Pelagio 
cie  Turnis  et  Sereno  de  Alassilia,  episcopis  Gallis 
a  paribus!'  Ewald  suggests  that  a  third  name  once 
appeared  in  the  heading,  namely,  that  of  yEtherius, 
the  Bishop  of  Lyons,^  who  would  be  hardly  likely  to 
be  left  out,  and  to  whom  Bede,  in  fact,  says  that  a 
letter  was  sent.  Bede,  however,  makes  a  mistake 
in  calling  him  Vergilius.  His  real  name  was 
yEtherius.  Turni  has  generally  been  identified  as 
Tours.  Pelagius  was,  in  fact,  the  successor  of  the 
famous  historian,  Martin,  who  had  died  only  a  year 
before,  as  Bishop  of  Tours.  Tours,  on  the  Loire, 
was,  however,  far  from  Augustine's  route,  and  it 
seems  difficult  tounderstand  howhe  should  have  been 
commended  to  his  care.  It  is  perhaps  a  proof  of 
the  Pope's  slight  knowledge  of  the  topography  of 
France.^  The  letter  says  that  although  among 
bishops  {sacerdotes)  endowed  with  that  charity  that 
pleases  God,  religious  men  require  no  man's  intro- 
duction, yet  he  takes  advantage  of  a  favourable 
opportunity  to  commend  Augustine,  whom  he  had 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  54  ;  Barmby,  vi.  56. 

^  He  was  bishop  c.  586-602 ;  Plummer,  Bede,  vol.  ii.  p.  39,  note. 
E.  and  H.  vi.  50. 

^  But  see  infra,  p.  35. 


32      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

sent  with  other  servants  of  God  for  the  good  of 
souls  and  with  God's  help.  In  order  that  they 
might  be  the  more  ready  to  help  him,  he  had  coun- 
selled Augustine  to  explain  the  nature  of  his  mission. 
He  also  recommended  to  them  the  presbyter, 
Candidus,  whom  he  had  sent  to  administer  the 
estates  of  the  poor  in  the  Church  in  Gaul.^ 

From  Lerins  Augustine  went  on  to  Marseilles. 

It  is  not  impossible  from  the  number  of  letters 
of  commendation  given  to  Augustine  on  his  second 
journey,  some  of  which  were  far  from  his  direct 
route,  that  he  was  commissioned  by  the  Pope  to 
visit  the  various  dioceses  of  Gaul  on  his  way 
through,  and  to  report  to  him  on  their  condition, 
etc.  etc.,  and  this  he  seems  to  have  done. 

From  Marseilles  Augustine  went  on  to  Aix, 
where  he  rejoined  his  companions,  to  whom  he  no 
doubt  read  the  Pope's  letter  above  named.  He  took 
a  letter  of  commendation  addressed  to  its  bishop, 
Protasius,  of  whom  Augustine  had  reported  favour- 
ably. In  it  the  Pope  asks  him  to  tell  Vergilius,  his 
Metropolitan,  whom  the  Pope  styles  brother  and 
co-bishop  [frater  et  coepiscopiis),  to  remit  to  Rome 
through  him  the  proceeds  of  the  papal  patrimony 
in  Gaul  which  belonged  to  the  poor  and  had  been 
detained  by  the  predecessor  of  Vergilius  {i.e.  by 
Bishop  Licerius),  who  had  looked  after  the  papal 
patrimony  at  Aries.  This  he  asks  him  to  do  because 
he,  Protasius,  had  been  vicedominus,  i.e.  vicar- 
general,  at  that  time,  and  knew  how  matters  stood, 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  50  ;  Barmby,  vi.  52. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  LETTERS  OF  COMMENDATION   3  3 

and  he  further  heartily  commended  Candidus,  "their 
common  son,"  to  him/ 

From  Aix  the  missionaries  went  on  to  Aries, 
the  capital  of  Provence,  and  the  stateliest  city  in 
Gaul — Gallula  Roma,  it  was  styled.  It  was  one  of 
the  seats  of  government  of  the  Burgundian  kingdom. 
In  his  letter  to  Vergilius,  the  Archbishop  of  Aries, 
who  had  recently  completed  the  cathedral  there  and 
who  was  Metropolitan  of  Gaul,  the  Pope  asked  for 
his  succour  and  help  for  the  missionaries  and  for 
Candidus,  the  rector  of  the  "little  patrimony  of 
St.  Peter."  He  complains  to  him  that  his  pre- 
decessor, i.e.  Licerius,  had  for  many  years  held  the 
patrimony,  and  had  kept  the  proceeds  in  his  own 
hands,  instead  of  remitting  them,  and  begs  Vergilius 
to  hand  them  over  to  Candidus.  He  concludes  with 
the  caustic  sentence  :  "  It  is  detestable  that  what  has 
been  assured  by  the  kings  of  the  nations  should  be 
reported  to  be  diverted  by  the  bishops"  {''Nam 
valde  est  execrabile,  ut  quod  a  regibus  gentium 
servatum  est,  ah  Episcopis  dicattir  ablatuni  ").^ 

The  Pope  also  wrote  a  letter  to  Arigius  the 
Patrician,  whose  reputation  he  says,  Augustine  had 
mentioned  to  him,  asking  him  to  help  and  succour 
the  travellers,  and  to  do  the  same  for  Candidus.^ 

Leaving  Aries,  the  missionaries  proceeded  along 
the  Rhone  valley,  strewn  with  so  many  remains  of 
Roman  greatness,  which  were  then,  no  doubt,  largely 
intact,  and  with   so  many  ancient  and  prosperous 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  53  ;  Barmby,  vi.  55. 
2  E.  and  H.  vi.  51  ;  Barmby,  vi.  53. 
^  E,  and  H.  vi.  56  ;  Barmby,  vi.  57. 

3 


34       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

settlements.  They  went  on  to  Vienna  (the  real 
Vienna  as  Freeman  calls  it),  the  modern  Vienne,  to 
whose  bishop,  Desiderius,  the  Pope  wrote  a  letter 
of  commendation  jointly  with  Syagrius,  the  Bishop 
of  Autun.^     They  then  went  on  to  Lyons. 

They  seem,  on  leaving  Lyons,  to  have  gone  to 
Autun,  and  then  to  Orleans,  to  visit  Queen  Bruni- 
childis  and  her  grandson  Theodebert.  Gregory  had 
written  letters  to  her,  and  to  her  two  grandsons. 
The  former  letter  has  been  blamed  for  its  obsequi- 
ous civilities  to  a  merciless  woman,  but  it  is  very 
unlikely  that  Gregory  in  writing  it  knew  much  about 
the  actual  internal  affairs  of  her  kingdom,  which  was 
a  long  way  off,  and  there  had  only  been  a  very  loose 
tie  between  Rome  and  "  the  Gauls."  Her  truculence 
also  only  developed  in  later  years  when  the  Pope 
was  dead,  and  she  was  now  widely  known  for  her 
political  genius,  her  culture,  and,  above  all,  for  her 
devotion  to  the  Empire  and  to  the  Church.  Her 
only  grave  offence  at  this  time  was  one  hardly 
treated  as  such  by  the  Franks,  namely,  her  second 
marriage  with  her  first  husband's  nephew.  In  his 
letter  the  Pope  begins  by  referring  to  reports  which 
had  reached  him  of  her  "Christianity"  {vestrae 
Ckrisiia7titas),  and  says  he  does  not  doubt  of  her 
goodness,  and  speaks  of  her  devotion  and  zeal  for 
the  faith.  He  goes  on  to  say  that  there  had  gone 
to  him  some  of  the  Anglian  people  who  wished 
to  become  Christians,  but  the  bishops  (the  word 
used  is  sacerdotes)  who  were   in   the    vicinity  (by 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  52  j  Bannby,  vi.  54. 


SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  VISIT  TO  TOURS      35 

which  no  doubt  Gaul  is  meant)  had  not  shown  any 
pastoral  solicitude  for  them  [sacej'dotes  qui  in  vicino 
sunt  pastoralem  erga  eos  sollicitudinem  non  habere). 
Not  wanting  to  be  responsible  for  their  eternal 
damnation,  he  had  sent  Augustine  and  his  com- 
panions to  learn  the  wishes  of  the  Anglians,  and  with 
her  help  to  try  and  convert  them.  He  had  in- 
structed them  that  in  order  to  carry  out  this  view 
they  ought  to  take  with  them  some  priests  {presby- 
teros  ducere)  from  the  neighbourhood  (<?  vicino).  He 
asked  her  to  protect  the  missionaries  and  to  assist 
them  in  the  good  work,  and  to  provide  for  their 
secure  journey  to  the  nation  of  the  Anglians. 
He  also  commended  to  her  his  well-beloved  son 
Candidus,  "  the  rector  of  the  patrimony  of  the  Holy 
See  situated  in  her  country."^ 

To  the  boy  princes,  Theodoric  and  Theodebert, 
he  also  wrote,  repeating  the  statement  about  the 
desire  of  the  Anglians  for  conversion  and  the 
negligence  of  the  bishops  in  the  neighbouring  dis- 
tricts to  do  the  work,  and  asking  them  to  help 
Augustine  and  his  companions,  saying  he  had 
charged  them  to  take  some  priests  from  the  neigh- 
bourhood, from  whom  they  might  ascertain  the 
disposition  of  the  Anglians,  and  who  should  act 
as  interpreters  [curn  quibus  eoruvt  possint  7nentes 
agnoscere  et  voluntates  ammonitione  sua).  To  them 
he  also  commends  Candidus,  the  patrimony  of 
St.  Peter  in  Gaul,  and  the  cause  of  the  poor.^ 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  57  ;  Barmby,  vi.  59. 
^  E.  a?td  H.  vi.  49  ;  Barmby,  vi.  58. 


36       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

These  letters  are  especially  interesting.  In  the 
first  place  because  they  show  that,  in  or  before 
the  year  596,  messengers  from  the  Anglians  had 
approached  the  Pope  in  regard  to  the  evangelising 
of  the  island,  and,  secondly,  it  would  seem  that  the 
Prankish  clergy  were  not  anxious  or  zealous  in 
converting  their  cousins  beyond  the  sea,  with  whom 
they  were  probably  on  bad  terms. 

One  of  Gregory's  letters  was  addressed,  as  we 
have  seen,  to  the  Bishop  of  Tours,  and  it  is  not 
impossible  that,  having  gone  to  Orleans,  Augustine 
would  proceed  down  the  Loire  at  least  as  far  as 
the  famous  See  of  St.  Martin,  in  order  that  he  might 
report  upon  its  condition  to  his  master.  Gocelin, 
writing  in  the  eleventh  century,^  has  a  legend  which 
is  incorrectly  given  in  the  Anglia  Sacra,  ii.  37,  and 
which,  if  founded  on  some  reputable  tradition,  shows 
that  Augustine  actually  went  into  the  west  of  France. 
According  to  this  story,  the  travellers  arrived  at  Pont 
de  Se,  in  Anjou,  wearied  and  tired.  They  crossed 
the  Loire,  when  a  rough  crowd  from  Se,  consisting 
chiefly  of  women,  drove  them  away  with  taunts  and 
jeers.  One  of  the  women  was  especially  offensive, 
whereupon  Augustine,  afraid  for  his  chastity,  took 
up  a  stick  {bahihis)  to  stop  her.  This  flew  from  his 
hand  to  a  great  distance,  and  as  a  result  a  spring 
gushed  out  and  the  crowd  ceased  their  aggressive 
attitude.  A  light  also  rested  over  the  elm  tree  where 
the  missionaries  were  reposing.  A  church  was  after- 
wards built  on  the  spot,  into  which,  says  Gocelin, 

^  See  Hist.  MSS.  Com.  iii. 


SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  VISIT  TO  TOURS      37 

no  woman  dared  to  enter,  afraid  of  the  saint's  dis- 
pleasure at  the  insult  offered  to  him  by  her  sex.^ 
Such  are  the  naive  stories  which  in  days  of  easy 
belief  gathered  round  famous  people  like  Augustine. 
This  one  has  the  special  infirmity  that  we  have  no 
earlier  authority  for  it  than  a  writer  who  wrote  five 
centuries  later. 

It  would  seem  that  the  missionaries  when  they 
returned  from  the  Loire  went  to  Soissons,  where 
King  Chlothaire  (whose  first  cousin  had  married  the 
King  of  Kent,  to  wHom  they  were  going)  received 
and  treated  them  well,  as  was  acknowledged  by  the 
Pope  in  a  subsequent  letter.^ 

The  travellers  went  very  leisurely.  This  has 
been  quoted  against  them  and  interpreted  as  show- 
ing want  of  zeal,  but  they  were  probably  following 
Gregory's  instructions.  He  no  doubt  wished  to 
have  a  full  report  from  them  as  to  the  state  of  things 
in  Gaul,  and  this  needed  time.  It  was  two  years 
since  they  had  left  Rome.  They  apparently  passed 
the  winter  of  596  and  597  in  Gaul,  where  they 
had  had  what  was  rather  a  triumphant  procession 
than  a  missionary  journey,  and  they  were  now  on 
the  verge  of  the  scene  of  their  later  labours.  It  is 
a  notable  fact,  as  showing  how  small  a  place  the 
mission  had  in  the  eyes  of  those  not  immediately 
interested,  that  it  is  ignored  by  the  continental 
writers.  Neither  Isidore  of  Seville  in  Spain  nor 
the  contemporary  French  writers  mention  it. 

^  Act.  Sand.  vol.  xviii.  May  26th. 

2  See  E.  and  H.  xi.  51  ;  Barmby,  xi.  61. 


CHAPTER    II 

Now  that  we  have  brought  the  missionaries  to 
within  sight  of  their  goal,  it  will  be  well  to  try 
and  realise  how  matters  then  stood  there.  Most 
of  the  writers  who  have  described  the  journey  of 
Augustine  have  pictured  an  England  at  this  time 
full  of  savagery  and  exceedingly  barbarous.  What 
we  know  of  the  archaeology  of  the  pagan  Anglo- 
Saxons  shows  this  to  be  an  entirely  mistaken  view. 
The  arts  were  very  advanced  among  them,  and 
they  have  left  us  in  the  pagan  cemeteries  of  Kent 
examples  of  their  splendid  metal  work  and  jewellery 
as  proofs  of  their  skill. 

With  the  exception  that  they  were  not  Christians, 
and  apparently  did  not  use  stone  or  brick  for  their 
buildings,  which  was  also  probably  the  case  in  the 
greater  part  of  France,  we  have  no  reason  of  any 
kind  to  suppose  that  they  were  a  whit  behind  their 
relations,  the  Franks  and  Lombards,  in  the  amenities 
and  surroundings  of  life.  They  had  no  books,  that 
is  true,  but  instead  of  books  they  had  long  memories 
for  poetry,  and  their  "dooms"  show  they  were  a  law- 
regulated  community  and  a  settled  and  agricultural 
people  with  an  elaborate  local  administration. 

i^thelberht,  King  of  Kent,  was  a  great  personage 

38 


tETHELBERHT,  king  of  KENT  39 

— rex  potentissinms,  Bede  calls  him.  He  held  the 
hegemony  of  the  Anglian  and  Saxon  princes,  which 
they  defined  by  the  word  Bretwalda.  He  was  the 
second  Anglo-Saxon  sovereign  so  styled  by  Bede, 
i^lle  of  Northumbria  having  been  the  first,  and 
he  controlled  the  most  cultivated  and  advanced 
part  of  the  country.  His  authority,  according  to 
Bede,  extended  to  the  H umber,  and  therefore 
included  the  Southern  Angles  in  Lincolnshire  and 
Nottinghamshire,  which  districts  he  had  apparently 
taken  from  the  Northumbrians.  He  would  hardly 
have  been  permitted  to  marry  a  Prankish  princess 
if  he  had  not  been  a  personage  with  a  royal 
establishment  and  surroundings.  His  subsequent 
conduct  shows  that  he  had  the  taste  and  tact  of  a 
high-bred  gentleman.  It  is  preposterous,  therefore, 
for  writers  to  suppose  that  in  going  to  Britain  the 
missionaries  were  facing  the  dangers  and  incon- 
veniences which  have  to  be  faced  in  entering  some 
utterly  savage  or  barbarous  country. 

In  addition  to  all  this,  the  Prankish  princess 
who  had  married  i^thelberht  was  herself  a 
Christian  and  a  Catholic,  and  therefore  ready  to 
make  the  way  easy  for  the  Pope's  evangelists. 
Bertha  or  Bercta,  as  she  was  called,  was,  according  to 
Gregory  of  Tours,  the  only  daughter  of  Charibert 
(the  Prench  equivalent  of  the  Saxon  Hereberht  or 
Herbert),  King  of  Paris,  who  reigned  from  561  to 
567,  and  of  his  wife,  Ingoberga,^  and  was  therefore 

^  op.  cit.  iv.  26  and  ix.  26,  27.  As  her  father  died  in  567,  she  must 
at  the  latest  have  been  born  in  or  before  568.  Her  mother  Ingoberga, 
according^  to  Gregory  of  Tours,  was  seventy  in  589.     If  that  state- 


40      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

a  cousin  of  Chlothaire,  the  reigning  King  of  Neustria, 
or  Soissons/  The  words  of  Gregory  of  Tours  are 
ambiguous,  but  seem  to  imply  that,  when  she  married, 
her  husband  y^thelberht  was  not  yet  king.  In  one 
place  he  says  she  married  a  man  in  Kent,^  and  in 
another  that  she  married  in  Kent  the  son  of  a 
certain  kingr.^  In  the  headnote  of  a  letter  addressed 
to  her  by  Gregory  *  she  is  called  y^thelberga,  and 
the  Pope  seems  to  have  so  called  her.  This  may 
mean  that  she  adopted  a  new  name  when  joining 
her  husband's  family. 

When  she  was  married  to  the  pagan  Prince 
y^thelberht,  it  was  stipulated  by  her  parents, 
according  to  Bede,  that  she  should  be  permitted  to 
practise  her  faith  unmolested,  and  should  be  accom- 
panied by  a  certain  bishop  named  Liudhard,  as  her 
chaplain  and  almoner.^  His  name  shows  he  was  a 
Frank. 

He  has  been  called  a  bishop  of  Soissons  by 

ment  is  reliable,  since  she  could  not  well  have  had  a  child  after  she 
was  forty,  she  must  have  been  born  before  559.  Gregory  may  well 
have  mistaken  the  age  of  the  old  lady,  however,  by  five  years.  In  that 
case  Bertha  may  have  been  born  as  late  as  563,  and  we  may  roughly 
conclude  that  she  was  born  somewhere  between  563  and  568.  As  her 
daughter  ^thelberga  was  married  to  King  Edwin  of  Northumbria  in 
625,  and  would  probably  be  born  within  a  year  of  her  mother's 
marriage  with  ^thelberht,  she  would,  if  then  twenty-five  years  old, 
have  been  born  in  the  year  600,  or  if  she  was  thirty,  and  we  can  hardly 
suppose  she  was  more,  then  she  would  be  born  in  595,  and  her 
mother  was  married  to  yEthelberht  in  594.  This  is  only  an  induction, 
but  I  think  it  a  reasonable  one.  Hauck,  Real.  En.  i.  520,  also  argues 
that  the  marriage  was  not  long  before  Augustine's  mission. 

^  Thom.as  of  Elmham  calls  her  by  mistake  the  daughter  of  King 
Dagobert,  who  discovered  {invenii)  the  body  of  Saint  Denis  (p.  133). 

2  Op.  cit.  iv.  26.  3  lb. 

*  See  E.  and  H.  xi.  35,  note.  ^  lb,  i.  25. 


SAINT  LIUDHARD  41 

some  writers,  doubtless  on  the  ground  that  Soissons 
was  the  capital  of  Bertha's  father's  kingdom,  but  no 
such  name  as  his  occurs  in  the  lists  of  the  bishops 
of  Soissons,  nor  do  the  authors  or  compilers  of  the 
Gallia  Christiana  name  him.  At  the  time  we  are 
writing  about,  Droctigisilus  was  the  Bishop  of 
Soissons. 
^  A  more  reputable  story  makes  him  a  bishop  of 
Senlis.  The  earliest  authorities  for  this  notion 
are,  however,  very  late,  namely,  the  Canterbury 
chroniclers,  Sprott  and  Thorn,  and  the  authors  of 
the  Gallia  Christiana,  who  call  him  Lethardus  or 
Letaldus,  and  whom  they  name  among  the  bishops 
of  Senlis.  He  was  said  to  have  come  with  Bertha 
as  early  as  566,  and  they  accordingly  mention 
him  after  a  bishop  who  subscribed  at  the  Council 
of  Paris  in  557.  Jacques  du  Perron,  Bishop  of 
Angouleme,^  and  almoner  to  Queen  Henrietta 
Maria  (thus  holding  a  similar  post  to  that  of  Queen 
Bertha's  chaplain),  in  drawing  a  parallel  between 
the  two  cases  of  the  first  Christian  Queen  of  Eng- 
land and  her  almoner,  and  the  first  Romanist  Queen 
after  the  rupture,  says:  "Gaul  it  was  which  sent 
to  the  English  their  first  Christian  Queen.  The 
clergy  of  Gaul  it  was  that  sent  them  their  first 
bishop,  her  almoner."  Montalembert  also  follows 
Sprott  and  Thorn  in  this  matter. 

Smith    in    his    edition    of  Bede   says   that   no 
such  name  occurs  in  St,  Marthon's  account  of  the 

^  Brown,  The  Christian  Church  in  these  Islands  before  Augustine, 
p.  13. 


42      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

bishops  of  Senlis.^  The  Sacramentary  of  Senlis, 
the  calendar  of  commemorations,  and  the  list  of 
bishops  are  all  silent  as  to  any  Bishop  Lethardus 
or  Liudhard.  It  would  seem,  in  fact,  that  he  was 
one  of  those  bishops  iti  partibus,  or  vagrant  bishops, 
who  abounded  in  Gaul  150  years  later,  and  were 
denounced  by  more  than  one  council  and  synod  held 
there.^ 

As  we  have  seen,  it  does  not  appear  to  be 
possible  to  put  Bertha's  marriage  earlier  than  about 
592-593,  which  would  be  also  the  date  of  her 
coming  to  England  with  her  bishop.  This  would 
be  after  her  mother's  death  in  589,  and  when  she 
doubtless  sorely  needed  a  home,  for  she  was  an 
orphan. 

It  would  seem  very  probable  that  Liudhard  was 
dead  when  Augustine  arrived,  or  Bede  would  have 
had  something  to  say  about  him  on  that  occasion, 
nor  would  the  missionaries  have  taken  immediate 
possession  of  his  church  as  they  did.  It  is  char- 
acteristic of  that  picturesque  reporter  of  fables, 
Gocelin,  that  he  makes  him  attend  at  St.  Martin's 
Church  when  the  Roman  teachers,  "superior  to  him 
as  gold  to  silver,"  went  there  {ibidem  quae  Dei  sunt 
agebani)?  He  was  buried  in  St.  Martin's.  Arch- 
bishop Laurence  afterwards  removed  his  body  into 
the  porticus  or  chapel  of  St.  Martin  in  the  Church 
of   SS.    Peter   and    Paul,    where    those    of    King 

^  op.  cit.  61,  note  3. 

2  Hardy,  Catalogue.,  etc.,  i.  175  and  176;  Plummer,  Bede.,  vol.  ii. 
p.  42. 

3  Vit.  Maj.  i.  520  ;  Bright,  57,  note  i. 


SAINT  LIUDHARD  43 

iEthelberht    and    his    Queen,    Bertha,    were    also 
laid.^ 

A  later  legendary  life  of  Liudhard  calls  him 
'^ praecursor  et  ianitor  ventiwi  Augtistini'''^  More 
than  one  very  late  "  Life "  of  St.  Liudhard  also 
give  an  account  of  his  death  and  of  the  miracles 
associated  with  his  name.  As  Plummer  says,^  it  is 
clearly  mythical  and  chronologically  impossible.  In 
the  additions  to  Bede's  Marty rology  his  obit  is 
given  on  the  4th  February  thus  :  Passio  S.  Liphardi 
martyris^  Cantorbeiae  archiepiscopi.  There  is  no 
good  authority  for  making  him  a  martyr  or  an 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  In  the  first  volume 
of  Dugdale's  Monasticon,  ed.  1655,  there  is  a 
copy  of  an  ancient  drawing  of  St.  Augustine's 
Canterbury,  which  was  made  after  1325.  It  was 
copied  for  Dugdale  in  1652  when  it  had  passed 
into  the  library  of  Trinity  Hall,  Cambridge.  It 
represents  the  altar  (dedicated  in  1325),  with  a  door 
on  each  side  (marked  "north  door"  and  "south 
door  ")  leading  to  the  shrines  containing  the  relics 
in  the  apse.  Above  the  superaltar,  on  each  side  of 
the  figure  of  Christ,  are  represented  two  shrines 
shaped  like  churches,  on  one  we  read,  "  Scs.  Letard," 
and  on  the  other,  "  Rellqe."* 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  Church  of  St.  Martin, 
where  Liudhard  officiated.  "  Bede  tells  us  that 
near  Canterbury,  on  the  eastern  side,  there  was  a 

^  Thomas  of  Elmham,  p.  132  ;  Thorn,  ii.  2. 

*  Hardy,  Catalogue,  etc.,  i.  176. 

*  Bede,  vol.  ii.  p.  42. 

^  See  also  Bishop  Brown,  The  Christian  Church,  etc.,  pp.  17,  18. 


44      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

church  dedicated  to  Saint  Martin  which  had  been 
built  in  ancient  days  when  the  Romans  were  still 
in  Britain,  in  which  the  Queen  {i.e.  Bertha)  was 
accustomed  to  pray." 

This  Church  of  St.  Martin,  the  ruins  of  which 
still  remain,  has  been  the  object  of  a  great  deal  of 
discussion.  Its  dedication  to  St.  Martin,  the  great 
Gallic  saint,  who  did  not  die  till  about  399  a.d., 
while  the  Romans  left  Britain  finally  in  407-409, 
makes  it  almost  certain  that  if  it  was  actually 
a  Roman  building,  it  had  been  rededicated  by 
Liudhard  in  the  name  of  St.  Martin.  Remains 
of  the  church  are  still  to  be  seen  on  the  east  side 
of  Canterbury,  outside  the  walls  on  a  steep  slope 
rising  from  west  to  east. 

The  late  Mr.  Micklethwaite  was  the  real  founder 
of  a  scientific  history  of  Saxon  methods  and  designs 
in  church  building,  and  I  have  the  greatest  faith 
in  his  judgment.  Speaking  of  the  buildings  in 
Britain  which  survive  from  that  period,  he  says  : 
"The  architecture,  if  it  may  be  called  architecture, 
was  a  debased  imitation  of  the  Italian  architecture 
of  the  time,  which  was  itself  in  a  very  degraded 
state.  The  method  of  building  was  traditional 
from  Roman  times,  and  there  were  ruins  of  Roman 
buildings  in  the  country  which  no  doubt  supplied 
architectural  ideas  as  well  as  material  for  the  new 
churches.  In  some  cases  we  find  better  work  than 
in  others,  and  some  of  the  best  is  among  that  which 
we  have  reason  to  think  the  oldest."* 

'  Arch.  Journ.  liii.  p.  294. 


s 


u 


CHURCH  OF  SAINT  MARTIN,  CANTERBURY    45 

Of  these  Saxon  churches,  St.  Martin's  was 
the  first  to  be  built.  Claims  have  been  put  in 
for  a  Roman  origin  of  the  existing  nave,  but, 
says  "our  Father  Anchises,"  just  named  :  "  I  have 
not  been  convinced  that  any  part  of  the  existing 
fabric  is  of  the  Roman  time.  I  do  not  dispute 
that  Austin  found  a  church  there,  but  I  think 
nothing  that  is  left  can  go  further  back  than 
the  coming  of  Queen  Bertha  and  her  Christian 
family  who  were  using  it  when  he  came.  Even  so, 
it  may  claim  to  be  the  oldest  of  English  churches, 
not  merely  by  survival,  but  in  fact."^  Again  he 
says:  "All  through  the  controversy  I  have  con- 
tended against  the  claim  for  the  present  nave  of 
St.  Martin's  being  Roman.  The  only  argument 
for  it  has  been  the  use  of  pounded  brick  in  the 
plaster  and  in  the  mortar  of  the  western  window 
arches.  But  that  by  itself  is  not  enough.  All 
Saxon  building  was  debased  Roman,  and  the  use 
of  pounded  brick  in  this  instance  proves  only  that 
there  was  some  one  about  at  the  building  who 
either  knew  by  tradition,  or  had  read,  or  had  noticed 
in  some  Roman  work  which,  perhaps,  he  had  helped 
to  pull  down,  that  it  was  used  by  the  Romans ; 
and  as  there  was  abundance  of  broken  Roman 
brick  lying  at  hand,  it  is  not  extraordinary  that  it 
should  have  been  used  here.  Mr.  Dovvker  found 
pounded  brick  in  the  opus  signmum  floors  at 
Reculver,  which  are  now  admitted  to  be  Saxon,  and 
it  has  also  been  found  at  St.  Pancras.     The  walling 

^  Arch.  Journ.  liii.  p.  295. 


46      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

of  the  nave  at  St.  Martin's  is  against  its  Roman 
date.  It  is  made  up  of  Roman  materials  used 
promiscuously  as  they  came  to  hand,  and  tells  of 
a  time  when  there  were  ruins  near,  at  which  the 
builders  might  help  themselves.  This  could 
scarcely  have  been  the  case  in  Kent  in  Roman 
times,  when  it  was  a  settled  and  peaceful  district, 
but  was  likely  enough  after  the  wars  and  confusion 
which  accompanied  the  English  conquest."^  The 
excavations  of  Mr.  Routledge  and  Mr.  Livett  have 
proved  that  the  present  nave  is  later  than  the 
western  part  of  the  present  chancel,  and  that  the 
latter  was  shortened  at  the  west  end  when  the  nave 
was  added  to  it. 

"  The  walls  of  the  eastern  part  of  the  present 
chancel  are  of  the  thirteenth  century.  Those  of 
the  western  part,  which  are  alone  primitive,  are 
entirely  built  of  brick,  and  nothing  like  them  is 
known  anywhere  else,  except  at  the  neighbouring 
Church  of  St.  Pancras,  which  is  built  in  exactly  the 
same  way,  and  the  date  of  one  must  be,  within  a 
few  years,  the  date  of  the  other."  ^ 

Judging  from  the  facts  we  now  know  about  the 
church,  Mr.  Micklethwaite,  who  has  given  a  ground- 
plan  of  it,  argues  that  the  original  building  was  a 
plain  oblong  chapel,  probably  not  very  much  more 
than  30  feet  long,  while  it  was  14  feet  6  inches  wide. 
Inside  at  the  east  end  of  the  original  chancel  there 
is  a  gap  in  the  wall,  which  it  has  been  surmised  tells 
of  an  apse  forming  the  presbytery  ;  and  about  the 

*  Arch.  Joum.  liii.  p.  316.  ^  lb.  314,  315. 


u 


CHURCH  OF  SAINT  MARTIN,  CANTERBURY     47 

middle  of  the  south  side  is  a  doorway  leading  to 
a  little  chamber  outside  {i.e.  a  so-called  porticus). 
This  was  entered  by  a  low,  square-headed  door- 
way. The  round-headed  doorway  on  the  south 
side  of  the  chancel,  though  itself  of  Saxon  date, 
is  evidently  an  insertion  in  the  wall/  None  of  the 
windows  of  the  earliest  church  remain,  but  it  is  fairly 
certain  they  were  very  narrow  and  deeply  splayed. 

Mr.  Peers,  in  his  account  of  the  remains  of  the 
earliest  church,  gives  some  additional  details.  He 
tells  us  that  the  walls  are  2  feet  2  inches  thick, 
with  courses  of  bricks,  five  to  a  foot.  The  opening 
into  the  porticus  or  chapel  is  3  feet  3  inches  wide, 
with  brick  jambs  straight  through  the  wall  and  a 
flat  head  with  a  heavy  ragstone  lintel.  The  width 
of  this  chapel  was  4  feet  3  inches,  and  when  intact 
it  was  probably  square.  Into  the  outer  face  of  the 
western  jamb  is  built  a  small  piece  of  a  fine-grained 
oolite,  bearing  part  of  a  dedicatory  inscription, 
perhaps  that  of  an  altar,  in  good  and  well-preserved 
lettering  of  an  early  type.      It  reads  thus  : — 

+  4-N    HONORE    SE^i 
ET    OMNIVM    SeORUM  ^ 

Such  are  the  remains  and  such  the  lessons  they 
teach  us  about  this  the  earliest  English  Church, 
which,  in  fact,  dates  from  an  earlier  time  than 
Augustine's  mission,  and  was  doubtless  erected  by 
Liudhard,  the  chaplain  of  Queen  Bertha,  and  was 

^  Arch.  /ourn.  liii.  p.  315  and  note  i. 
2  lb.  Iviii.  pp.  412,  etc. 


V 


48      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  shrine  where  she  and  her  household  once 
worshipped.  It  was  in  all  probability  built  by 
Gaulish  workmen,  and  after  the  debased  Roman 
style  then  existing  in  Gaul.  We  have  no  evidence 
that  the  practice  of  building  in  stone  or  brick  had 
survived  as  a  tradition  among  the  Saxons. 

In  regard  to  the  rite  followed  by  Liudhard  at 
St.  Martin's — that  is  to  say,  the  rite  of  the  Queen's 
chapel — it  was  no  doubt  the  Galilean  one,  while 
the  Prankish  priests  who  went  with  Augustine 
probably  knew  no  other. 

Bede  does  not  name  Liudhard  again,  and,  as  I 
have  said,  it  is  possible  he  was  dead  at  the  time  of 
Augustine's  arrival.  It  is  also  possible  that  the 
/  messages  from  England,  saying  that  people  there 
were  anxious  to  be  converted,^  were  sent  by  Queen 
Bertha  herself  on  the  death  of  her  chaplain.  If  she 
had  had  a  chaplain  or  confessor  living,  there  would 
not  have  been  any  occasion  to  complain  of  the 
clergy  of  the  neighbouring  districts  (by  which  Gaul 
and  not  Wales  seems  to  be  meant)  for  their  want 
of  zeal  in  furthering  the  cause,  nor  would  there 
have  been  a  necessity  for  interpreters  to  accom- 
pany Augustine.  We  must  take  it  that  whatever 
glimmer  of  Christian  light  had  been  shed  by  Liud- 
hard's  lamp  was  now  nearly,  if  not  quite,  extinct. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  very  probable  indeed 
that,  like  Theodelinda  at  Pavia,  Alchfled,  the  wife 
of  Peada  in  Mercia,  and  y^thelberga,  the  wife  of 
Edwin  of  Northumbria,  Bertha  was  a  very  potent 

^  Vide  supra,  p.  258. 


^THELBERHT,  KING  OF  KENT  49 

agent  in  the  conversion  of  her  husband  and  his 
people,  i^thelberht  and  his  nobles  had  probably 
been  persuaded  by  the  Prankish  princess  that  the 
new  faith  was  better  than  the  old  one,  and  that  it 
was  time  the  Anglians  should  renew  their  inter- 
course with  the  civilised  world,  which  had  become 
Christian.  It  is  at  all  events  plain  that  -^thelberht 
received  the  monks  cordially  and  treated  them 
well. 

Almost  everything  we  know  that  is  authentic 
about  yEthelberht  we  owe  to  Bede.  The  additional 
statements  in  the  Anglo- Saxon  Chroniclers^,  it  seems 
to  me,  mere  inventions  of  the  author  of  that  late 
ninth-century  compilation.  First  as  to  his  name. 
It  does  not  seem  to  have  been  sufficiently  noticed 
that  the  earliest  native  author  who  refers  to  him 
does  not  call  him  ^thelberht  at  all.  This  is  the 
anonymous  author  of  the  genealogies  in  Nennius, 
who  wrote  in  the  seventh  century.  He  calls  him 
Ealdberht.^  This  is  a  perfectly  good  Anglo-Saxon 
name,  and  an  Ealdberht  clito  is  mentioned  in  the 
Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle  under  the  year  722,  and 
is  said  to  have  been  killed  by  fire  in  725.  The 
genealogies  in  question  are  a  very  good  and  safe 
authority.  How  the  statement  is  to  be  reconciled 
with  Gregory's  letter  and  with  Bede,  who  both 
call  him  ^^thelberht,  I  do  not  know.  Can  he  have 
changed  his  name  o'n  his  marriage  ?  i^thelberht 
is  essentially  the  same  name  as  Albert.  Did  he, 
on    the   other   hand,  adopt   the    name   he   is  now 

1  M.H.B.  p.  74. 
4 


so      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

known  by  at  his  baptism  ?  It  is  a  form  of  name 
very  frequent  afterwards  in  Kent,  while  it  is 
most  unlike  those  of  his  reputed  ancestors. 

The  genealogy  attached  to  Nennius  calls  his 
father  Eormoric/  Bede  calls  him  Irminric.^  This 
was  a  famous  name.  Hermanric  formed  a  great 
empire  (by  uniting  the  Goths  and  neighbouring 
nations),  which  was  destroyed  by  Attila.  He  fills 
a  notable  place  in  romance  as  well  as  history,  and 
the  name  of  the  tribe,  the  Jutes,  which  conquered 
Kent  seems  to  be  a  dialectical  form  of  Goth.  The 
name  of  Gothland,  an  island  in  the  Baltic,  is  pro- 
nounced Yutland  in  the  North. 

The  father  of  Eormenric  was  Ossa,^  the  stem- 
father  and  originator  of  the  clan  of  the  ^E^scings, 
from  whom  the  Kentish  kings  took  their  family 
name.  We  know  nothing  more  about  him,  nor 
yet  about  Eormenric,  except  that  in  addition  to 
^thelberht  the  latter  also  had  a  daughter  Ricula, 
who,  according  to  Bede,  married  the  father  of 
Sabercht  or  Sebert,  the  King  of  the  East  Saxons. 

iE^thelberht,  according  to  Bede,  died  in  the  year 
6 1 6,  after  a  reign  of  fifty-six  years.  This  date  is 
inconsistent  with  his  statement  that  he  died  twenty- 
seven  years  after  his  conversion.  If  the  former  be 
reliable,  he  mounted  the  throne  in  560.  In  Codex  F 
of  the  Chronicle,  and  in  that  alone,  which  was  written 
in  the  twelfth  century,  and  is  of  no  authority  on  such 

1  M.H.B.  p.  74. 

2  op.  cit.  ii.  5.     The  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle  cbWs  him  Eormenric, 
sub  ann.  552  et  616. 

3  Nennius,  loc.  cit. 


^THELBERHT,  KING  OF  KENT  51 

a  point,  he  is  said  to  have  been  born  in  552,  which 
looks  incredible,  since  that  would  make  him  only- 
eight  years  old  at  his  accession.  The  only  event 
in  his  reign  mentioned  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle 
I  believe  to  be  probably  fabulous,  namely,  that  in  568 
he  fought  against  Ceawlin,  King  of  Wessex,  and 
Cutha,  his  brother,  and  was  driven  into  Kent,  while 
two  of  his  Ealdormen,  Oslaf  and  Cnebba,  were  killed 
at  Wibbandune.  Bede  speaks  of  him  as  rex  y^thel- 
berct  in  Cantia  potentissimus,  which  is  ambiguous, 
and  may  mean  either  that  he  was  most  powerful 
in  Kent,  or  king  in  Kent  and  most  powerful.  He 
adds  that  his  authority  extended  to  "the  very  large 
river  H umber  {tisque  Humbrae  Jltmiinis  maxi7ni),  by 
which  the  Southern  and  the  Northern  Angles  were 
separated  from  one  another."  This  is  supported  by 
other  facts — thus,  although  his  nephew  Sabercht  was 
under-king  of  Essex,  y^thelberht's  interference  in 
the  foundation  of  the  See  of  London  shows  he 
was  really  supreme  there.  Bede  further  says  that 
Redwald,  who  was  king  in  East  Anglia,  and  who 
was  doubtless  subordinate  to  ^thelberht,  "became 
a  Christian  in  Kent,"  although  he  relapsed  on 
returning  home  again,  which  seems  to  point  to 
his  having  also  been  under  the  influence  of  ^^thel- 
berht.  It  is  probable  that  at  this  time  there  was 
no  separate  kingdom  of  Mercia,  while  the  Middle 
Angles,  who  were  the  inhabitants  of  Lincolnshire 
and  its  borders,  were  doubtless  also  directly  subject 
to  the  Bretwalda  ^thelberht.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  is  probable  that  Kent  properly  so  called,  which 


5  2      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

was  bounded  on  the  north  by  the  Thames,  then 
included  Surrey,  or  parts  of  it. 

From  the  accounts  Bede  gives  of  the  conference 
with  the  British  bishops  at  Aust,^  it  would  seem 
that  the  meeting  was  held  in  a  district  under  the 
supreme  control  of  yEthelberht,  which  would  carry 
his  immediate  rule  as  far  west  as  Herefordshire  and 
Worcestershire,  and  it  would  seem  that  he  was,  in 
fact,  acknowledged  as  supreme  chief  in  all  eastern, 
central,  and  southern  England,  and  as  far  north  as 
the  Humber. 

His  principal  residence  and  palace  was  outside 
the  walls  of  Durovernum  or  Canterbury  (the  Can- 
twara-byrig  of  the  Anglo-Saxons),  which  Bede  calls 
his  metropolis  {?netropolis  sua).  It  still  remains 
ecclesiastically  the  metropolis  of  Britain,  and  a  few 
paragraphs  may  be  opportunely  devoted  to  it. 

Mr.  T.  G.  Godfrey  Faussett,  in  his  valuable 
memoir  on  Canterbury  before  Domesday,  of  which 
I  gladly  avail  myself,  points  out  how,  in  the 
Itinerary  of  Antonine,  Durovernum  is  the  last  stage 
on  the  great  Roman  road  leading  from  London  to 
the  three  Kentish  harbour  fortresses.  At  Duro- 
vernum that  road  divided  into  three  :  one  gaining 
the  harbour  of  Ritupis,  or  Richborough,  in  twelve 
miles ;  another,  Dubrae,  i.e.  Dover,  in  fourteen  miles  ; 
and  the  third,  Lemanae,  or  Lympne,  in  sixteen 
miles.  Of  these  three  ports  Richborough  is  by  far 
the  most  important,  and  was  probably  the  first  to 
be  constructed,  since  the  road  to  it  from  Canterbury 

^  Vide  infra. 


KINGDOM  AND  CAPITAL  OF  .ETHELBERHT     53 

continues  in  a  straight  line.  Richborough  harbour 
is  the  primary  origin  of  Canterbury,  which  is  placed 
on  an  important  ford  on  the  road  leading  to  it.^ 

Durovernum  is  first  mentioned  by  Ptolemy,^ 
who  calls  it  Aapovevov,  and  is  named  by  him  with 
AovBcviov  and  'PovToviriai  as  the  three  chief  cities  of 
the  ''Kdvrioi." 

Its  name  is  written  in  several  ways  by  the 
Roman  writers,  as  Durovernum,  Durovernia,  and 
Durovernis,  As  it  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Notitia, 
it  would  seem  that  it  had  no  garrison  when  that 
work  was  compiled,  and  its  importance  was  then 
doubtless  commercial  rather  than  military. 

It  was  a  walled  town  with  several  gates.  The 
wall  and  gates  are  discussed  at  considerable  length 
by  Mr.  Faussett  in  the  memoir  already  mentioned. 
It  was  about  eight  hundred  yards  long  and  four 
hundred  yards  wide. 

On  the  withdrawal  of  the  Romans,  Durovernum 
was  apparently  abandoned,  and  for  a  long  time  its 
ruins  remained  uninhabited  and  desolate.  Mr. 
Faussett  says  that  this  is  pointed  at  by  the  fact 
that  it  alone  among  the  towns  of  East  Kent  lost 
its  name  and  acquired  a  new  one,  namely,  Can- 
twarabyrig ;  the  others,  Reculver,  Richborough, 
Dover,  and  Lympne,  all  retaining  their  old  ones 
in  a  slightly  altered  form.  The  best  proof  that 
the  Saxons  did  not  settle  there  is  the  absence  of 
any  pagan  Saxon  cemetery  in  the  city  or  near  it, 
while  they  abound  in  the  east  of  Kent. 

1  Op.  cit.  p.  372.  ^  Lib.  ii.  372. 


54      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

"This  view,"  says  our  author,  "is  entirely  cor- 
roborated by  the  remains  of  the  Roman  city.  The 
lower  parts  of  the  houses  being  found  in  a  very  well- 
preserved  condition  ;  and  beautiful  pavements,  all 
unworn,  occasionally  coming  to  light,  seem  to  show  a 
period  of  almost  Pompeian  burial,  neglect,  and  over- 
growth, so  that  the  later  restorers  of  the  city  noticed 
nothing  of  the  valuable  materials  below.  Moreover, 
not  a  single  street  is  on  the  site  of  a  Roman  street, 
remains  of  buildings  being  under  them  all,  with  the 
exception  of  Beercart  Lane  and  part  of  Watling 
Street,  and  even  here  (where  must  always  have 
remained  the  great  thoroughfare  of  England, 
whether  through  a  city  or  not)  the  original  straight 
line  of  the  road  is  so  straggled  from,  as  to  show 
that  at  one  period  the  property  flanking  the  street 
was  of  no  more  value  or  consideration  than  the 
waste  of  a  country  roadside."  ^ 

Mr.  Faussett  argues  that  the  capital  of  the 
earlier  Jutish  kings  was  really  at  Richborough,  in 
favour  of  which  he  mentions  that  its  great  suburb 
Ash  bears  the  name  of  the  second  king  of  Kent. 
It  also  contains  the  largest  and  richest  pagan 
Saxon  cemetery  ever  discovered.  Other  royal 
cities  he  claims  were  Faversham,  where  there  is 
another  large  cemetery  called  the  King's  Field ; 
while  Kingston  -  under  -  Barham  -  Downs  probably 
formed  a  third.  A  very  rich  cemetery  was  found 
there,  containing,  inter  alia,  the  wonderful  brooch 
of  Bryan  Faussett,  now  at  Liverpool,  which  must 

1  Op.  cit.  380  and  381. 


THE  TOPOGRAPHY  OF  OLD  CANTERBURY  55 

have  been  buried  with  a  queen.      It  seems  probable 
that  Reculver  was  a  fourth  important  settlement. 

Another  good  reason  for  believing  that  there 
was  no  continuity  between  the  life  of  the  old 
Roman  city  and  the  later  English  one  is,  that  none 
of  the  gates  retain  their  old  names.  Thus  the 
ground  made  over  by  ^thelberht  to  the  monks 
was  called,  or  was  near,  the  Staple  Gate,  or  the 
Market  Gate,  from  the  market  close  by.  That  the 
ground  in  question  should  have  been  thus  empty 
for  the  newcomers  goes  not  a  little  to  show,  says 
our  author,  that  the  Saxon  part  of  the  city,  at  least, 
must  have  then  been  of  very  recent  foundation.^ 

The  gate  in  the  new  piece  of  wall  to  the 
eastward  was  called  Quene  Gate,  which  is  first 
mentioned  in  a  charter  of  762,  and  tradition  con- 
nects it  with  Queen  Bertha,  which  conjecture  Mr. 
Faussett  is  tempted  to  accept.  The  Saxon  town  was 
the  Roman  town  elongated.  Every  gate  apparently 
had  a  market-place  outside  it.  "The  Staple"  was 
outside  Staple  Gate.  The  charter  just  mentioned 
speaks  of  a  house  ^^  quae  jam  ad  Quenegahmi  urbis 
Dorovernis  in  foro  [i.e.  in  the  market-place]  posita 
est.""^  From  other  charters,  etc.,  we  learn  that 
Ritherchepe,  i.e.  Rither  market,  lay  between  the 
Dover  and  Richborough  roads,  that  is,  outside  the 
modern  Riding  Gate  and  Newingate,  and  nearly  to 
Burgate.  Lastly,  outside  Worth  Gate  was  the  wine 
market,  or  WInchepe,  which  name  still  lives.^ 

1  Op.  at.  384  and  385. 

^  Kemble,  Codex  Dipt,  cix  ;  Birch,  Cart.  192. 

3  Faussett,  op.  cit.  386. 


56      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

The  pagan  Saxons  disliked  towns,  and  especially 
ruined  towns,  which  they  seem  to  have  looked  upon 
as  inhabited  by  demons,  and  their  settlements  are 
almost  universally  found  outside  the  precincts  of 
the  old  Roman  towns.  That  this  was  the  case  at 
Canterbury  we  may  be  certain  from  the  fact  that 
Bertha's  royal  chapel,  which  was  doubtless  near 
the  palace,  was  situated  outside  the  walls,  and  it 
is  probable,  since  no  pagan  cemeteries  have  been 
found  near  the  city,  that  it  only  became  a  royal 
residence  when  ^thelberht  married  the  French 
King's  daughter,  and  probably  built  for  her  a  more 
stately  residence  than  his  ancestors  had  lived  in. 
It  was  about  the  royal  residence  that  the  new 
settlement  of  the  English  was  grouped. 

Let  us  turn  once  more  to  the  missionaries. 
They  reached  the  English  Channel  soon  after 
Easter  Day,  which  in  597  fell  on  14th  April.  At 
this  time  the  principal  port  of  embarkation  in  Gaul 
for  travellers  to  Britain  was  Quentavic,^  the  modern 
Ktaples,  a  few  miles  south  of  Boulogne,  from  which, 
as  we  are  expressly  told.  Archbishop  Theodore 
set  out  a  few  years  later.  It  is  interesting  to 
remember  that  Boulogne  and  Th^rouanne  were 
both  at  this  time  pagan,  having  relapsed  about  550, 
while  they  did  not  become  Christian  again  till  630, 
when  they  were  brought  back  by  St.  Omer. 

The  party  was  a  numerous  one,  and  they  prob- 
ably occupied  more  than  one  of  the  trading  vessels 

^  i.e.,  vicus  ad  Quantiam,  the  town  on  the  Canche  (Plummer,  Bede, 
vol.  ii.  p.  203). 


LANDING-PLACE  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE     57 

(each  carrying  a  single  mast  and  a  square-sail,  and 
made  in  the  Roman  fashion),  which  then  kept  up 
communication  with  Britain. 

Whatever  doubts  there  may  be  about  the  port 
of  embarkation  of  the  missionaries,  there  can  be 
none  as  to  their  place  of  arrival,  which,  according  to 
Bede,  was  in  the  island  of  Tanatos  (Thanet)/  He 
does  not  specify  the  exact  spot  more  clearly.  The 
gradual  silting  of  the  coast  in  this  part  of  Kent  has 
greatly  altered  the  general  contour  of  the  land  and 
of  the  channels  round  the  island,  which  has  resulted 
in  many  differences  of  opinion  about  the  exact  spot 
where  the  landing,  so  critical  for  our  history,  actually 
took  place. 

The  sluggish  Stour,  as  it  is  very  fitly  named, 
comes  down  from  Canterbury,  and  presently  enters 
an  estuary  at  a  place  still  called  Stourmouth.  This 
estuary  divides  Thanet  from  the  mainland  of  Kent. 
Of  it  Bede  uses  the  curious  phrase  that  it  "pushes 
both  heads  into  the  sea "  {jttrumque  enim  caput 
protendit  in  7nare).  Part  of  its  waters,  in  fact,  then 
passed  southwards  and  were  called  the  Wantsum, 

^  Solinus,  who  flourished  about  80  A.D.,  refers  to  it  in  a  phrase, 
"  Adtanatos  insula  adsptratur  freto  Gallico,  a  Britanniae  continente 
aestuario  tenui  separata,  frumejttariis  campis  felix,  et  glebi  uberi, 
nee  tantuni  sibi,  verum  et  aliis  salubris  locis  :  nam  qtium  ipsa  nulla 
serpatur  an^ue,  asportata  inde  terra  quoquo  gentium  invecta  sit, 
angues  Jtecat"  {Polyhistoriae,  chap.  xxii.  ;  M.H.B.  p.  x).  Isidore 
{Hisp.  lib.  xiv.  chap.  vi.  ;  M.H.B.  p.  cii)  copies  Solinus,  and  derives 
the  name  from  BavaTo^.  This  early  use  of  its  present  name  shows 
that  Nennius  was  wrong  in  the  statement  that  the  island  was  so 
called  by  the  Saxons.  The  latter  adds  that  the  Britons  called  it 
Ruichim  (chap.  xxix.  ;  M.H.B.  p.  63).  Nennius  is  followed  by  Asser, 
who  gives  the  name  as  Ruim  (Jb.  470).  It  has  been  suggested  that 
this  latter  is  the  origin  of  the  name  Ramsgate. 


58      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

and  part  northwards,  and  were  called  the  Glenlade 
or  Inlade.  The  outlets  of  this  channel,  which  was 
an  ideal  anchorage-ground  in  bad  weather,  were  in 
Roman  times  protected  on  the  south  by  Rutupiae, 
called  Ritupis  by  Antonine,  and  Rutubi  by  Bede,^ 
and  which  Bishop  Brown  says  may  have  been  pro- 
nounced Rithubis.  Its  famous  ruins  still  remain 
to  us  in  "  the  mighty  walls  "  of  Richborough.^  It 
was  situated  on  a  small  island,  and  not  on  the  main- 
land. On  the  north  the  main  channel  was  protected 
by  another  fortress,  called  Regulbium  by  the  Romans, 
and  Racuulfe  by  Bede,  represented  by  the  modern 
Reculvers,  the  ancient  twin  towers  of  whose  church 
are  so  conspicuous  as  we  enter  the  estuary  of  the 
Thames.  The  name  of  Northmouth  still  remains 
near  Reculver.  The  waters  of  the  Stour,  however, 
no  longer  pass  out  by  their  old  route,  but  wind  with 
many  convolutions  through  the  low-lying  ground 
and  escape  into  Pegwell  Bay.  In  Bede's  time  the 
Wantsum  was  3  stadia  or  furlongs  wide,  and  ford- 
able  only  at  two  places.  One  of  them,  as  Bishop 
Brown  says,  was  Sarre,  at  the  ford  still  called  St. 
Nicholas,  at  Wade.^  The  other,  south  of  Minster. 
The  strait  is  now  silted  up,  but  was  not  completely  so 
at  any  point  till  the  reign  of  Henry  the  Eighth.* 

Thanet,  says  Bede,  was  not  large,  "  measured  by 
the  standard  of  the  natives,"  and  accommodated  600 
families,^  that  is  to  say,  it  contained  600  hides,  a 

^  He  says  the  Anglians  called  it  Reptacestir. 

*  Augustine  and  His  Companions^  28  and  29. 

^  Ad.  Vadum.  *  Twine  de  reb.  Albion,  i.  25. 

^  Bede,  i.  25. 


LANDING-PLACE  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE     59 

hide  being  the  rough  estimate  of  the  land  needed 
to  support  a  family.  In  the  Life  of  St.  Mildred  the 
island  is  caWed  ^os  et  thalamus  regni} 

The  exact  landing-place  of  Augustine  and  his 
party  has  been  discussed  with  considerable  ingenuity 
and  warmth.  Bishop  Brown  suggests  with  great  pro- 
bability that  the  fortress  of  Richborough  once  gave 
its  name  to  the  whole  "harbour,"  which  extended 
from  Sandwich  to  Ramsgate,  and  is  now  in  a  large 
measure  represented  by  Pegwell  Bay.^  This  seems 
a  reasonable  supposition,  especially  as  Richborough 
itself  was  not  then  on  the  mainland  but  on  a  small 
island.  It  was  very  probably  at  Richborough,  where 
there  were  quays  and  other  facilities,  that  the  larger 
vessels  anchored  and  discharged  ;  and  it  was  at 
Richborough,  which  Thorn  calls  Retesborough,  that 
he  makes  Augustine  and  his  party  land. 

As  Professor  M'Kenna  Hughes  reminds  us, 
Thorn  lived  only  ten  miles  off,  at-  Canterbury,  and 
must  have  been  quite  at  home  in  Thanet,  since  he 
was  treasurer  of  St.  Augustine's  Abbey,  which 
owned  the  dues  paid  in  the  harbour  of  Richborough, 
and  which  he  speaks  of  as  part  of  Thanet.  He 
was  followed  by  Thomas  of  Elmham.  Thorn  says 
expressly  that  Augustine  and  his  monks  came 
ashore  in  the  isle  of  Thanet  at  a  place  called  Retes- 
borough ;  adding  that  "  our  father  Augustine,"  on 
stepping  ashore,  happened  to  stand  on  a  certain 
stone,  which  took  the  impression  of  his  feet  as  if  it 

^  Hardy,  Catalogue^  etc.,  i.  377. 

2  Augustine  and  His  Companions.,  30, 


6o      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

had  been  clay.  The  stone,  he  says,  was  removed 
and  put  inside  the  saint's  chapel  there,  and  every 
year  on  the  day  of  his  burial  crowds  of  people 
gathered  together  for  devotion  and  in  the  hope  of 
recovering  their  health,  saying,  "We  will  worship 
in  the  place  where  his  feet  stood."  ^  I  only  mention 
this  to  show  what  the  tradition  about  St.  Augustine's 
landing-place  was  at  Canterbury. 

In  quite  modern  times  it  has  been  conjectured, 
and  the  purely  arbitrary  guess  has  been  converted 
into  an  article  of  faith  by  many,  that  Augustine 
landed  at  a  place  called  Ebbs  Fleet  in  Thanet.  I  do 
not  know  a  single  ancient  writer  who  says  anything 
of  the  kind,  and  the  notion  has  really  arisen  in 
consequence  of  the  landing-place  of  Augustine 
having  been  identified  with  that  of  Hengist  and 
Horsa,  as  reported  by  Bede  and  those  who  followed 
him.  These  sea-rovers,  however,  were  entirely 
different  people  to  the  monks.  They  were  wont  to 
avoid  "harbours  "and  to  run  their  boats  on  beaches  in 
sheltered  inlets,  while  the  latter  doubtless  travelled 
in  trading  vessels  of  considerable  size.  I  know  no 
valid  reason  whatever  for  making  Augustine  land 
at  Ebbs  Fleet,  except  Dean  Stanley's  imposing 
rhetoric.  It  is  not  improbable  that  this  rhetoric,  and 
the  fact  that  Lord  Granville's  committee  committed 
themselves  to  the  same  opinion,  will  continue  to 
impose  the  fable  on  innocent  people.  The  com- 
mittee just  named  erected  a  commemorative  cross 
about  half  a  mile  from  the  farm  still  called  Ebbs 

^  See  Thorn's  Chronicle^  X.  Scriptores,  col.  1759. 


THE  MONKS'  ENTRY  INTO  CANTERBURY     6i 

Fleet,  near  which  is  a  well  (known  locally  as  St. 
Augustine's  well).  This  will  continue  to  delude 
people  into  the  notion  that  there  is  a  real  founda- 
tion for  the  view. 

Let  us  now  proceed.  Augustine  and  his  monks, 
of  course,  knew  no  English.  They  knew  Ecclesias- 
tical Latin  fairly  well,  and  spoke  a  rather  barbarous 
jargon  in  which  Latin  was  changing  into  Italian, 
and  that  was  all.  Bede  tells  us  they  were  about 
[ferme)  forty  in  number.  He  says  they  had 
brought  with  them,  on  the  advice  of  the  Pope,  inter- 
preters of  Prankish  race.  These  may  have  lived 
on  the  Saxon  settlements  of  Bayeux,  and,  if  so,  have 
known  the  language ;  but  anyhow,  it  seems  pretty 
plain  that  Prankish  was  understood  by  the  Saxons, 
doubtless  with  some  difficulty,  and  as  the  speech 
of  Yorkshire  is  understood  by  the  people  of  London. 
What  follows  is,  of  course,  the  traditional  story  as 
preserved  at  Canterbury,  but  it  has  a  most  respectable 
paternity.  We  are  told  that  the  missionaries  sent  an 
interpreter  to  interview  ^^thelberht,  and  to  tell  him 
they  had  come  from  Rome  with  the  best  of  tidings, 
and  promising  that  in  case  he  and  his  people  were 
willing  "  they  might  without  doubt  have  eternal  joy 
in  Heaven  and  a  realm  without  end  in  the  future, 
with  the  living  and  true  God."  Having  heard  him, 
the  King  ordered  the  missionaries  to  remain  in  the 
island  where  they  were,  and  to  be  duly  provided 
with  necessaries.  The  fame  of  the  Christian 
religion,  he  said,  had  already  reached  him,  for 
he  had   a  Christian  wife  named  Bercta.     In   the 


62      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

accommodating  attitude  of  the  King  we  may  no 
doubt  trace  the  handiwork  of  his  Christian  queen. 
After  some  days  impost  dies)  the  King  went  to  the 
island  and  summoned  Augustine  and  his  monks  to  a 
conference  in  the  open  air,  for  he  feared  that  if  they 
entered  a  house  the  monks  might  bring  about  his 
destruction  by  magic  and  sorcery — siquid  mali- 
ficae  artis  kabuissent,  eum  siipera^ido  deciperent} 
Sorcery  and  magic  formed  a  large  element  in  the 
religious  practices  of  all  the  Teutonic  tribes,  and 
notably  of  the  pagan  English.  Bede  describes  how 
in  a  time  of  great  mortality  the  Northumbrians 
in  the  day  of  St.  Cuthbert  forsook  the  sacraments 
and  had  recourse  to  the  false  remedies  of  idolatry 
[aderratica idolatriae medicamina concurrebant),  "as 
if  they  could  have  got  rid  of  the  plague  sent  by  God 
by  means  of  their  incantations,  spells  {fylacteria), 
or  other  devilish  arts  "  {daemonicae  artis  arcana)} 
In  his  Peniteittial,  Theodore  prescribes  punishments 
for  women  who  practised  incantations  or  diabolical 
divinations.^  A  similar  enactment  was  issued  by 
the  Synod  of  Clovesho.^  The  interview  between 
the  monks  and  yEthelberht,  says  Green,  "doubtless 
took  place  on  the  Downs  above  Minster,  where 
the  eye  nowadays  catches,  miles  away  over  the 
marshes,  the  dun  towers  of  Canterbury."     Another 


^  Bede,  i.  25.  2  /^^  iy_  27. 

^  Op.  cit.  lib.  i.  chap.  xv.  par.  4. 

*  The  delinquencies  there  denounced  are :  ''''  inter  caeterapeccamina, 
paganas  observaiiones,  id  est,  divines,  sortilegos,  auguria,  auspicia, 
fylacteria,  incantationes,  sive  omnes  spurcitias  impiorwn  gentiliumque 
errata''''  (Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  364). 


THE  MONKS'  ENTRY  INTO  CANTERBURY     63 

and  more  probable  view  puts  it  at  Richborough, 
where  a  cruciform  ridge  was  long  after  called  St. 
Augustine's  Cross/  In  a  map  of  Thanet  given  by 
Thomas  of  Elmham,  there  is  a  representation  of 
the  ambit  made  by  a  hunted  stag  belonging  to 
Dompneva,  the  mother  of  Saint  Mildred,  in  one 
day's  galloping,  and  which  formed  the  boundary 
of  the  lands  presented  by  the  King  to  her,  and 
was  afterwards  known  as  Dompnevae  meta?  It 
was  probably  taken  from  a  much  older  map.  On 
it  a  tree  is  marked  in  the  centre  of  the  island, 
near  the  Beacon,  with  two  large  crosses  near  it, 
which  it  is  suggested  by  Bishop  Brown  mark  the 
traditional  meeting-place.^ 

Bede  describes  how  the  monks,  who  were  well 
trained  in  such  effective  pageantry,  went  to  the 
interview,  preceded  by  a  silver  processional  cross, 
and  carrying  a  painted  representation  of  the  Saviour 
upon  a  panel;  they  marched  singing  litanies  "for 
their  own  eternal  safety  and  that  of  their  hosts." 
Gocelin  reports  a  tradition,  professing  to  come 
from  an  old  man  whose  grandfather  Augustine  had 
baptized,  describing  the  latter  as  very  tall,  and 
as  standing  head  and  shoulders  above  the  rest.* 
In  this,  says  Bright,  he  resembled  St.  Columba.® 
Augustine  now  proceeded  at  the  King's  command  to 

^  Bright,  op.  cit.  52,  note  3. 
2  Op.  cit.  pp.  207  and  208. 
^  Augustine  and  His  Companions.,  41. 

*  Vit.  Aug.  49.     It  has  been  suggested  this  may  have  been  a 
mistake  for  Paulinus. 

"  Adamnan,  Vit.  Colutnba,  vol.  i.  i. 


64      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

deliver  his  message  to  ^thelberht  and  his  thanes 
and  ealdormen.  According  to  yElfric,  who  Hved 
about  the  year  looo,  Augustine  told  them  how  the 
merciful  Saviour  with  His  own  sufferings  redeemed 
this  guilty  world,  and  opened  an  entrance  into  the 
Kingdom  of  Heaven  to  faithful  men/  As  Mason  ^ 
says,  these  words,  which  had  no  doubt  to  be  inter- 
preted, are  not  mentioned  by  Bede,  and  were  very 
probably  an  invention  of  ^Ifric.  Bede,  however, 
professes  to  give  the  king's  reply,  in  which  he  is 
supposed  to  have  said  that  the  traveller's  words  and 
promises  were  pleasant,  but  inasmuch  as  they  were 
newandstrange  hecouldnot  assentto  them  all  atonce, 
and  leave  the  faith  so  long  professed  by  his  fathers  and 
the  Anglian  race  ;  but  as  they  had  come  a  long  way 
to  tell  him  what  they  deemed  to  be  the  truth,  and  he 
wished  to  inquire  further,  he  would  take  care  they 
were  not  molested,  but  rather  that  they  should  be 
hospitably  entertained,  and  their  wants  provided 
for,  no  doubt  at  his  own  expense.  He  accordingly 
offered  them  quarters  at  Canterbury,  close  to  where 
he  lived.  Thither  they  thereupon  set  out.  It  has 
been  inferred  from  Bede's  words  that  they  travelled 
on  foot,  in  procession,  singing  by  the  way,  but 
this  is  most  unlikely.  To  cloistered  monks  unaccus- 
tomed to  exercise,  a  ten  miles'  walk  would  have  been 
a  wearisome  trial.  What  is  more  likely  is  that  they 
went  in  a  cavalcade  on  horses  or  mules  until  they 
reached  the  outskirts  of  the  city.     One  thing  must 

1  See  ^Ifric,  Homilies^  ii.  129  ;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  11. 

2  Op.  cit.  p.  38,  note  2. 


THE  MONKS'  ENTRY  INTO  CANTERBURY     65 

be  remembered.  When  we  now  think  of  Bene- 
dictine monks,  we  picture  them  as  wearing  black 
robes — "Black  Benedictines"  we  call  them;  but  it 
seems  pretty  clear  that  at  that  time  they  were  not  so 
dressed,  but  were  robed  in  dark-coloured  home-spun 
much  after  the  fashion  of  the  later  Franciscans. 

On  nearing  Canterbury  it  is  very  likely  that 
they  dismounted,  sending  their  sumpter  beasts  on, 
and  walked  in  procession.  We  may  be  sure  it 
was  a  striking-  sio-ht  to  the  Eng-lish  of  all  classes 
when  they  watched  these  tonsured  bare-headed 
men  in  hooded  brown  cloaks,  walking  two  and  two 
singing  their  litanies,  and  with  the  tall  figure  of 
their  abbot  towering  above  them,  and  headed  by 
a  brother  carrying  a  silver  cross  as  a  standard 
{cr7icem  pro  vexillo  ferentes  argenteam)^  and  another 
carrying  a  picture  of  our  Saviour  painted  on  a 
panel  {in  tabula  depictani).  They  had  no  doubt 
followed  the  Roman  road  from  Richborough  to 
Canterbury,  to  the  top  of  the  present  St.  Martin's 
Hill,  where  they  had  probably  dismounted. 

Bede  reports  the  words  they  sang,  namely, 
Deprecamtir  ie,  D amine,  in  07nni  misericordia  tua, 
ut  auferatur  furor  tuus  et  ira  tua  a  civitate  ista,  et 
de  domo  sancta  ttia,  qtioniam  peccavimus.  Alleluja 
(We  beseech  Thee,  O  Lord,  in  all  Thy  mercy  that 
Thy  wrath  and  Thine  anger  may  be  turned  from 
this  city  and  Thy  Holy  House,  though  we  have 
sinned.     Alleluja).^ 

This  litany  and  antiphon  or  anthem  is  founded 

1  Bede,  i.  ch.  25. 
5 


66      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

on  Daniel  ix.  i6.  The  Rev.  H.  A.  Wilson  says  the 
words  are  in  close  agreement  with  the  Latin  Version 
of  that  prayer  cited  by  the  greater  Augustine, 
and  are  closer  than  the  version  in  the  Vulgate.^  It 
belongs  to  the  Rogation  Days.^  Bright  suggests 
that  Augustine  had  probably  heard  it  the  previous 
spring  when  he  arrived  in  Provence,  for  it  was  a 
Gaulish  and  not  a  Roman  service  at  this  time.f  "It 
was  not  until  the  time  of  Leo  the  Third  {795-816) 
that  the  Rogation  litanies  were  established  at  Rome/ 
The  earliest  sacramentaries  of  the  Gregorian 
class  do  not  recognise  the  Rogation  Days,  while  in 
Gaul  they  are  said  to  have  had  their  beginning  at 
Vienne,  about  the  year  470.  Their  general  adoption 
was  ordered  by  the  Council  of  Orleans  in  511,  and 
in  567  a  council  held  at  Lyons  provided  that  similar 
litanies  should  also  be  used  in  the  week  preceding 
the  first  Sunday  of  November.^  The  particular 
anthem  quoted  by  Bede  occurs  in  one  of  the 
Rogation  litanies  in  use  long  after  at  Vienne,  and 
probably  in  other  churches  of  France.  It  was 
probably  introduced  into  England  by  Augustine, 
since  the  Council  of  Clovesho  (747)  orders  the 
observance  of  the  Rogation  processions, — secundum 
mor'em  prio7'2im  nostro7'um.^ 

From    the    height    of    St.    Martin's    Hill    the 

^  St.  August.  Ep.  cxi.  ad  Victorianum  ;  Mason,  op.  cit.  Diss.  iv. 
p.  236. 

2  See  Plummer,  ii.  43.  ^  Op.  cit.  55. 

*  Liber  Pontificalis  (ed.  Duchesne),  ii.  12. 
'^  Bruns,  Canones,  ii.  163,  224  ;  Wilson,  op.  cit.  p.  236. 
®  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  368. 


THE  MOxNKS'  ENTRY  INTO  CANTERBURY     67 

monks  would  look  forth  on  St.  Martin's  Church, 
erected  on  the  slopes  below  them,  with  the 
royal  palace  close  by,  and  on  the  wood-built 
suburb  of  the  old  city  farther  down,  the  Canterbury 
of  ^thelberht/  Stanley  remarks  how  the  view 
from  the  present  Church  of  St.  Martin  thus  becomes 
"one  of  the  most  inspiriting  that  can  be  found  in  all 
the  world."  ^  English  Canterbury,  as  contrasted 
with  the  ruins  of  Durovernum,  was  then  doubtless 
a  mere  collection  of  modest  wooden  houses. 

Bede,    who  calls  Canterbury  the  metropolis  of 
his  kingdom,  tells  us  that  ^thelberht  gave  Augus-     i 
tine  and  his  companions  a  residence  {inansio),  and      ^ 
promised  that  he  should  be  duly  cared  for  and  have        \ 
permission  to  preach.^     Thomas  of  Elmham  calls  it 
Stabelgate,  and  so  it  is  called  in  a  rhymed  notice  of 
Augustine's  arrival  given  by  him — 

"  Mansio  signatur,  quae  Stabelgate  notatur 
Hac  et  in  urbe  datur  Dorobernia  quae  vocitatur." 

The  name  has  been  misunderstood,  and  I  agree 
with  Mr.  Faussett  in  treating  it  as  connected  with 
"  the  Staple  "  or  market,  which  was  no  doubt  held 
close  by.  Thorn  says  it  was  situated  in  the  parish 
of  St.  Alphege,  over  against  King  Street  on  the 
north,  close  by  an  old  heathen  temple  where 
.^thelberht  and  his  men  used  to  worship.*  It  was 
not  impossibly  outside  the  town,  somewhere  within 
the  later  precincts  of  St.  Augustine's  Abbey.     A 

^  Bright,  op.  cit.  54.  2  Stanley,  54. 

3  Op.  cit.  \.  25.  ■*  Thorn,  op.  cit.  1759. 


68      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

late  and  quite  unreliable  writer  says  that  yEthelberht 
gave  up  his  royal  residence  at  Canterbury  and  went 
to  live  at  Reculver,  which  is  improbable  ;  nor  would 
such  an  honour  have  escaped  Bede,  if  it  had  ever 
occurred. 

The  travellers  now  no  doubt  proceeded  to  build 
themselves  a  suitable  home.  We  have  no  means 
of  knowing  what  it  was  like,  but  we  may  be  sure 
it  was  very  different  to,  and  contrasted  with,  the 
stately  Benedictine  houses  of  later  days.  It  was 
almost  certainly  enclosed  by  a  running  mound  with 
palings  on  the  top,  so  as  to  secure  privacy,  while  the 
buildings  were  doubtless  of  wood  and  probably 
thatched,  and  not  unlikely  each  one  of  the  principal 
rooms  was  in  a  detached  building,  the  whole  being 
homely  and  not  very  conspicuous.  For  a  church  the 
monks  took  over  the  small  building  dedicated  to  St. 
Martin,  where  Liudhard  had  officiated  and  where 
there  must  have  been  but  scanty  room  for  the  new 
community.  This  they  doubtless  continued  to  use 
till  they  could  build  themselves  a  larger  church. 
In  one  way  their  position  was  unique.  They  were 
the  only  Benedictines  who  were  at  this  time  to  be 
found  north  of  the  Alps ;  the  first  swarm  of  a 
fertile  hive.  It  should  always  be  remembered  that 
they  were  missionary  monks,  and  knew  nothing 
of  what  we  understand  by  parishes.  They  had 
come  to  convert  the  Anglians  as  a  whole,  and  had 
as  yet  no  flock  or  congregation. 

Bede  says  of  them :  "  The  monks  began  to  follow 
the    apostolical   life  of  the  primitive  Church,  and 


CHURCH  OF  ST.  PANCRAS  AT  CANTERBURY    69 

with  assiduous  prayers,  vigils,  and  fasts,  preaching 
the  Word  of  God  to  whom  they  could,  disregard- 
ing the  things  of  this  world  and  receiving  from 
those  whom  they  taught  what  was  necessary  for 
life,  living  as  they  taught  others  to  live,  and  ready  to 
suffer  or  die  for  the  cause  of  truth."  "What  naturally 
followed?"  {quid77tora?),\\es2iys.  "Some  believed 
and  were  baptized,  admiring  the  simplicity  of  the  in- 
nocent life  and  the  sweetness  of  the  heavenly  doctrine 
of  the  monks.  In  their  Church  of  St.  Martin  they 
sang,  prayed,  said  masses,  preached  and  baptized."^ 
In  regard  to  their  services,  we  can  hardly  doubt 
they  were  pretty  much  the  same  as  they  had  been 
accustomed  to  at  St.  Andrew's  Monastery,  their  old 
home.  Bede"  expressly  says  their  singing  was 
juxta  morem  Romanorum. 

We  must  now  make  a  digression.  The  Church 
of  St.  Martin  already  described  is  not  the  only 
very  primitive  church  at  Canterbury  of  which 
considerable  remains  exist.  There  is  another 
church  with  claims  to  almost  equal  antiquity,  and 
which,  according  to  the  very  weighty  opinion  of 
Mr.  Micklethwaite,  was  built  in  the  same  fashion 
and  must   be    treated   as    very  nearly  coeval  with 

^  In  regard  to  St.  Martin's  Church  a  fabulous  legend  afterwards 
arose,  that  it  became  the  see  of  a  bishop  suffragan  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  and  that  it  remained  so  till  the  days  of  Lanfranc  (see 
Monasficon,  ed.  1653,  i.  26  ;  Hasted's  Kent,  iv.  49).  Mr.  Plummer 
declares  there  is  no  foundation  for  the  saga,  and  scoffs  at  the  state- 
ment {Bede,  ii.  43).  Haddan  and  Stubbs  trace  the  story  to  an  inference 
from  a  charter  of  /Ethelred,  dated  867,  in  which  the  Church  of 
St.  Martin  is  mentioned  {op.  a't,  iii.  658  ;  Bede,  i.  26). 

^  Op.  cit.  ii.  20. 


70       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

it.  This  church  was  dedicated  to  St.  Pancras. 
Perhaps  the  most  remarkable  feature  about  it  is 
that  it  is  not  mentioned  by  Bede,  nor,  so  far  as  we 
know,  by  any  writer  until  we  get  to  the  days  of 
the  late  Canterbury  chroniclers,  Sprott  and  Thorn. 
Yet  the  remains  are  unmistakably  there,  and  show 
how  frequently  archseological  evidence  is  of  greater 
value  than  the  written  word. 

It  is  not  altogether  difficult  to  explain  how  it 
was  overlooked  by  Bede  and  his  successors,  who 
had  not  a  close  personal  acquaintance  with  Canter- 
bury. The  fact  is,  that  it  was  built  in  what  became 
the  precincts  of  the  great  Abbey  of  St.  Augustine. 
This  is  especially  attested  in  "  several  wills  of  the 
fifteenth  century  proved  in  the  Consistory  Court 
at  Canterbury,  containing  bequests  to,  or  directions 
for  burial  in  the  Chapel  of  St.  Pancras.  In  them 
it  is  usually  described  as  within  the  cemetery  of 
the  Monastery  of  St.  Austin,  outside  the  walls  of 
the  city  of  Canterbury."  The  cemetery  was  also 
a  favourite  place  of  burial.  One  of  these  wills, 
that  of  Hamon  Bele,  dated  the  7th  November  1492, 
contains  a  bequest  of  £2^,  6s.  8d.,  ''ad  repara- 
cionem  capelle  Sancti  Panci^acii  mfra  precinctum 
cimiterii  Sancti  August ini  ac  ad  reparacionem 
Capelle  ubi  Sane t us  Augustinus  primo  celebravit 
missa^n  in  Anglia  dicte  Capelle  Sancti  Pancracii 
an7iexey  ^ 

It  is  clear,   therefore,  that  in    Bede's  time   the 
small  Church  of   St.   Pancras  was  situated  within 

^  W.  H.  St.  John  Hope,  Arch.  Cant.  xxv.  235-6. 


CHURCH  OF  ST.  PANCRAS  AT  CANTERBURY    7 1 

the  precincts  of  the  abbey,  was  no  doubt  quite 
overshadowed  by  the  much  larger  church  of  the 
monastery,  and  would  to  any  casual  observer  look 
merely  like  an  unimportant  and  quite  subordinate 
building  forming-  part  of  the  abbey. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  Canterbury  tradition 
about  the  church,  as  reported  by  Thorn  in  his 
account  of  St.  Augustine,  He  says:  "There  was 
situated  on  the  east  of  the  city,  between  its  walls 
and  the  Church  of  St.  Martin,  an  idol  temple 
where  yEthelberht  used  to  worship  according  to 
the  rites  of  his  nation,  and  in  company  with  his 
grandees  to  sacrifice  to  demons  and  not  to  God 
{siiis  demoniis  et  non  Deo  san^ificare).  This  was 
duly  purgated  and  purified  by  Augustine  from 
the  pollutions  and  defilements  {inquinamentis  et 
sordibus)  of  "the  Gentiles."  He  also  broke  the 
idol,  and  dedicated  the  temple  {synagogd)  to  St. 
Pancratius  the  Martyr,  and  this  was  the  first 
church  dedicated  by  St.  Augustine."^  St.  Pancras, 
the  boy  -  martyr,  is  supposed  to  have  been 
specially  dear  to  Gregory,  the  reputed  patron  and 
teacher  of  boys  and  girls.  The  family  of  St. 
Pancras  are  said  to  have  owned  the  part  of 
the  Caelian  Hill  where  the  Monastery  of  St. 
Andrew  at  Rome  was  planted,  and  there  is  a 
church  dedicated  to  the  Saint,  which  can  be  seen 
from  that  monastery,  so  that  his  name  was  a 
familiar  one  to  Augustine.  The  Church  of  St. 
Pancras    at    Rome    is    situated    on   the   Janiculum, 

^  Thorn,  col.  1760. 


72       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

just  outside  the  walls.  To  revert  to  Thorn.  He 
goes  on  to  say  that  in  his  time  there  still  existed 
in  the  southern  chapel  [porticus)  of  this  church 
an  altar  in  which  St.  Augustine  was  wont  to 
celebrate  Mass,  and  where  previously  the  image 
{simulacrzmi)  of  the  King  had  stood.  He  further 
adds  that  there  still  remained  in  his  day  {ix.  about 
1397),  on  the  east  wall  of  this  chapel,  traces  of  the 
handiwork  of  the  Devil,  who,  on  seeing  St.  Augustine 
perform  Mass  where  he  had  himself  been  master, 
had  tried  to  destroy  the  building,^  and  had  left  two 
deep  grooves  in  the  masonry  which  he  had  made  with 
his  claws.  "Those  who  resort  to  St.  Augustine's 
Monastery,"  says  Bright,  "may  see,  somewhat  east- 
ward of  its  precincts,  an  old  brick  arch  which 
has  been  supposed  to  be  a  relic  of  this  building. 
Dean  Stanley  says  that,  in  addition,  there  was 
a  fragment  of  one  of  its  walls  on  a  rising  ground 
with  St.  Martin's  Hill  behind  it.  Mr.  Micklethwaite 
was  strongly  of  opinion  that  it  was  entirely  a  Saxon 
church,  and  in  regard  to  Thorn's  story  about  the 
idol  temple,  which  he  supposed  was  its  precursor, 
he  says  :  "  Those  who  argue  for  its  having  been 
a  heathen  temple  must  explain  the  fact  of  the 
temple  of  the  heathen  god  being  built  after  the 
fashion  of  a  Christian  church,  and  one  so  satis- 
factory to  the  missioners  from  Rome,  that  they 
made  it  the  model  upon  which  their  smaller 
churches  were  built."  ^  The  site  of  the  church  has 
been  recently  completely  explored  by  Mr.  St.  J.  Hope 

^  Thorn,  col.  1760.  -  Afxh.  Jouy?t.  liii.  316. 


CJ 


CHURCH  OF  ST.  PANCRAS  AT  CANTERBURY    73 

and  Canon    Routle^e,   and    its   remains    have   also 
been  described  in  detail  by  Mr.  Peers.     The  church 
consisted  of  a  presbytery  with  an  apse  forming  a 
chancel  about  ;^o  feet  6    inches   long  and  22  feet 
wide,   opening  into  a  nave  42  feet   7   inches   long 
by  26  feet  7|-  inches  wide  (which  constitutes  what 
the   architects    call  a  short  nave),   by  a  colonnade 
of  four  Roman    columns,    of   which    the  base  and 
part  of  the    shaft  of   the   southernmost  remain  in 
situ.     Mr.   Hope  says  the  diameter  of  the  columns 
at  the   base  was   \6\  inches,    which  gives  a    pro- 
bable  height   of    II    feet.      In    the   centres  of  the 
north,    south,    and    west   sides   of  the    nave    were 
doorways  leading  into  small  rectangular  buildings, 
that   at    the    west    being   an    entrance    porch    with 
two   doors  ;    the  other   two  chapels  were   probably 
entered    from   the   nave   only.     These  latter    were 
clearly    adjuncts    of   the    type    called  poi'ticus   by 
Bede,  and  the  entrance  doors  from  the  nave  were 
cut  throuoh  the  walls  after  the  latter   were    built. 
Mr.  Hope  says  this  necessitated  the  cutting  away 
of  the  external  buttresses  at  the  same  point.     All 
these    doors,    he    adds,    run    straight    through    the 
walls,  and  have  no  rebates  for  doors,  which  must 
have  been  hung  from  wooden  frames  wedged  into 
the    openings.     The  thickness    of   the  walls  in  all 
parts    of  the    building  is    i    foot    10  inches.     The 
walls  of  the  nave,  which  still  remain  to  the  height 
of  about  a  foot  to   i   foot   10   inches,   are  built  of 
Roman    bricks,    and   laid    in    regular   courses,   five 
courses    to  a  foot,   set   in  a   yellow-brown    mortar. 


74       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

and  have  been  plastered  inside  and  out.  Courses 
of  herring-bone  brick  occur  in  both  the  north  and 
south  walls  externally  ;  the  mortar  is  hard  and  of 
good  quality.  At  the  north-west  and  south-west 
angles  were  pairs  of  buttresses  of  brick,  like  the 
nave  walls.  There  were  similar  buttresses  on  each 
side  of  the  west  door,  and  one  at  each  of  the 
eastern  angles  of  the  nave.  Such  buttresses,  says 
Dr.  Baldwin  Brown,  are  very  rare  in  pre-Conquest 
work.  They  are  banded  into  the  walls.  All  three 
doorways  have  plain  square  jambs,  and  may  have 
had  arched  heads,  but  no  proof  of  this  exists.  The 
western  doorway  as  originally  set  out  was  7  feet 
9  inches  wide,  but  was  altered  after  the  build- 
ing had  been  carried  up  about  3  feet  to  6  feet 
6  inches.  Mr.  Hope  says  that  the  doorway  was 
further  narrowed  to  2  feet  7 J  inches  about  11 20, 
by  the  insertion  within  it  of  another  doorway  with 
a  stepped  sill.  There  is  no  evidence  as  to  the 
windows  or  the  other  architectural  features  of  the 
upper  part  of  the  walls. 

The  central  opening  from  the  nave  to  the 
presbytery  was  9  feet  wide,  and  was  spanned  by 
a  brick  arch,  part  of  which  still  lies  on  the  floor  as 
it  fell.  Mr.  Hope  calculates  that,  allowing  6  inches 
for  the  thickness  of  the  impost,  this  would  give 
a  total  height  for  the  central  arch  of  about  1 5  J  feet. 
On  each  side  of  this  opening  were  two  narrower 
ones,  which  may  have  had  arches  or  flat  lintels. 
These  latter  rude  openings  were  blocked  up  very 
early  in    the    history   of  the   church,    with  a  wall 


CHURCH  OF  ST.  PANCRAS  AT  CANTERBURY   75 

I  foot  10  inches  wide,  of  Roman  brick  in  white 
pebbly  mortar.  This  was  doubtless  because  the 
central  arch  showed  sio-ns  of  weakness.  The  re- 
mainine  fragrment  of  one  of  the  columns  with  its 
base  shows  they  were  of  good  Roman  work,  and 
they  were  doubtless  derived  from  some  building  in 
Roman  Canterbury.  It  is  the  only  wrought  stone 
in  the  building  which  remains.  The  presbytery 
was  rebuilt  in  later  times,  but  fragments  of  it 
remain  in  the  present  building.  Enough  of  the 
springing  of  the  early  apse  is  left  to  show  that 
its  form  was  that  of  a  half-ellipse  rather  than  a 
half-circle.  The  apse  did  not  start  immediately 
from  the  line  of  the  arches,  but  the  chancel  walls 
were  carried  on  for  a  space  of  10  feet  in  parallel 
lines ;  a  buttress  marked  on  the  exterior  where 
the  curve  of  the  apse  began.  The  north  chapel 
iyportictis)  was  destroyed  in  mediaeval  times.  The 
walls  of  the  two  chapels  and  the  porch  were  clearly 
built  after  those  of  the  nave  (though  Mr.  Peers  sug- 
gests that  they  probably  formed  part  of  the  original 
design),  for  the  walls  of  the  three  chapels  are  not 
banded  into  those  of  the  nave.  The  southern  one 
is  10  feet  6  inches  long,  and  about  9  feet  4  inches 
wide  internally.  The  walls  are  of  Roman  bricks 
set  in  white  mortar  mixed  with  sea-shells,  and  with 
four  courses  to  a  foot  instead  of  five.  Remains  of 
an  altar  of  much  later  date  are  attached  to  the  south 
wall  of  the  apartment,  and  is  doubtless  the  one 
mentioned  by  Thorn  which  may  have  replaced  an 
earlier  one.     The  walls  of  this  chapel  were  stand- 


^6       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

ing  in  the  eighteenth  century.  The  western  chapel 
was  really  a  porch.  Like  the  others,  it  was  added 
after  the  walls  of  the  church  had  been  erected.  It 
is  the  same  size  as  the  southern  one.  Its  north 
wall,  which  separated  the  monks'  and  lay  people's 
burial-ground,  still  remains,  to  the  height  of  13  feet 
and  more.  Its  mortar,  like  that  of  the  south 
porch  and  the  blocking  of  the  eastern  arcade,  all 
early  additions  to  the  original  plan,  is  white,  and  not 
yellow  as  are  the  rest  of  the  nave  and  its  buttresses. 

The  western  door  was  arched.  The  arch,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Hope,  was  probably  about  1 1  feet  high, 
and  the  porch  was  plastered  inside  and  out ;  the 
external  plaster  being  a  coating  of  the  mortar  used 
in  the  building.  A  small  piece  of  what  may  have 
been  the  original  floor,  of  smooth  white  plaster 
6  inches  thick,  still  remains.^ 

The  notable  thing  to  remember  about  this  Church 
of  St.  Pancras  is  its  resemblance  to  that  of  St. 
Martin,  from  which  it  was  in  all  probability  copied. 
It  differed  from  it  in  its  larger  size  and  somewhat 
more  elaborate  plan,  and  notably  in  the  fact  that, 
like  many  of  the  early  Italian  churches,  its  nave  and 
chancel  were  separated,  not  by  a  single  archway, 
but  by  a  colonnade  forming  three  arches  ;  and  by 
the  further  fact  that  there  is  a  presbytery  with 
parallel  sides  and  10  feet  in  length  between  the 
nave  and  the  apse. 

It  is  perfectly  plain,  therefore,  that  in  the  ruins 

^  W.  H.  St.  John  Hope,  Arch.  Cant.  xxv.  222,  etc. ;  C.  R.  Peers, 
Arch.  Journal^  Iviii.  408-413;  B.  Brown,  Arts  in  Early  Efigland, 
vol.  ii.  pp.  122-135. 


BAPTISM  OF  ^^THELBERHT  jy 

of  the  old  chapel  of  St.  Pancras  we  have  the  remains 
of  a  very  primitive  monument  of  English  Christianity, 
almost  certainly  going  back  to  the  days  of  its  founder, 
St.  Augustine.  This  is  not  all.  It  is  exceedingly 
probable  that  some  of  the  things  said  of  St.  Martin's 
Church  by  Bede  really  applied  to  the  other  church. 
St.  Martin's  was  a  very  small  building,  a  good 
deal  smaller  than  that  of  St.  Pancras,  and  we  may 
be  sure  that  the  forty  monks  with  their  dependants 
would  find  the  former  a  very  inadequate  place  for 
their  services,  and  would  set  about  building  a  new 
church  as  soon  as  may  be,  and  that  the  Church 
of  St.  Pancras  was,  in  fact,  the  first  one  built  by  the 
Roman  missionaries  in  Britain. 

Let  us  now  return  to  the  doings  of  the  mis- 
sionaries. We  read  how  presently  the  King,  moved 
by  the  godly  lives  of  the  monks,  the  Divine  message 
they  delivered,  the  miracles  they  performed,  and 
probably  even  more  by  the  gentle  suasion  of  his 
wife,  consented  to  be  baptized.  Bede  does  not  say 
where  this  took  place.  Thomas  of  Elmham,  a  very 
inaccurate  person,  says  it  was  at  Christ  Church,  but 
that  church  was  as  yet  unbuilt.  It  has  been  gener- 
ally supposed  it  was  at  St.  Martin's,  but  this  seems 
impossible.  There  would  not  be  room  there  for  such 
a  pageant,  nor  are  there  any  remains  of  a  baptistery 
there.  It  may  have  been  at  St.  Pancras.  Inasmuch 
as  we  are  told,  however,  that  a  large  number  of  his 
people  were  baptized  in  the  river  Swale,^  it  may 
be  that  -^thelberht  was  also  baptized  there,  and 

^  Vide  tn/ra,  p.  85. 


78       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

yet  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  one  condition  of  the 
service  as  then  performed  could  have  taken  place  in 
such  an  open  spot  in  the  case  of  a  king,  namely, 
the  divesting  himself  of  his  clothes  in  public. 

The  securing  as  a  convert  of  the  King,  who  was 
the  first  important  capture  made  by  the  monks, 
tempts  me  to  a  digression  in  regard  to  the  baptismal 
service  at  this  time,  which  was  picturesque  and 
interesting. 

Theceremonyofbaptismof  adults  at  the  beginning 
of  the  seventh  century  has  been  much  elucidated  by 
Duchesne,  who  quotes  ample  authorities  for  his  view. 
I  will  give  a  condensed  account  of  it  according 
to  his  description,  from  which  it  will  be  seen  how 
very  far  it  had  departed  from  the  methods  of  really 
primitive  times.  There  were  two  principal  rites, 
the  Roman  and  the  Galilean,  and  it  is  difficult  to 
know  which  of  them  was  followed  in  the  case  of 
^thelberht,  but  it  is  very  likely  that  the  Roman  one 
was  followed.  In  this  the  convert  first  presented 
himself  to  the  priest,  who,  after  blowing  in  his  face 
and  repeating  an  exorcism,  Ut  exeat  et  recedat  \_dia- 
bolus],  marked  him  on  the  forehead  with  the  sign 
of  a  cross,  accompanied  by  the  words,  In  iiomme 
Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti.  This  was  followed 
by  a  prayer  recited  by  the  priest  with  his  hands 
extended  over  the  candidate.^  Salt,  which  had 
been  previously  exorcised,^  was  then  administered 
by  the  celebrant,  who  put  a  particle  of  it  in  the 

1  Its  terms  are  given  by  Duchesne  after  the  Gelasian  Sacrament- 
ary  Christian  Worship,  p.  296. 

*  The  exorcism  is  duly  given  by  Duchesne,  ib.  p.  297^ 


BAPTISM  IN  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  TIME     79 

mouth  of  the  candidate  with  the  words,  Accipe 
N.  sal  sapieniiae,  propitiatus  in  vitam  aeterna7n. 
Then  followed  another  prayer.^ 

Having  gone  through  these  ceremonies,  the 
candidate  was  deemed  a  catechumen,  and  was 
admitted  to  religious  assemblies  but  not  to  the 
Eucharistic  Liturgy,  so-called.  The  catechumens 
had  a  special  place  assigned  them  in  church, 
but  were  dismissed  before  the  beginning  of  the 
holy  mysteries. 

The  catechumens  or  competentes  being  thus 
initiated,  were  next  prepared  by  instructions  and 
exercises  during  the  season  of  Lent  in  a  series 
of  seven  meetings  called  scrutinies,  at  which 
certain  prayers  and  rites  were  employed  "in  view  of 
the  gradual  casting  out  of  the  evil  spirit  by  forcing 
him  to  relinquish  his  hold  over  those  who  were 
about  to  pass  into  the  kingdom  of  Christ." 

At  the  first  scrutiny  the  elect  gave  in  their 
names,  which  were  inscribed  on  a  register.  Then 
the  sexes  were  separated,  the  men  on  the  right 
and  the  women  on  the  left.  The  Mass  then  began. 
After  the  Collect  and  before  the  Lections  a  deacon 
called  on  them  to  prostrate  themselves  in  prayer, 
which  they  concluded  by  all  saying  Amen,  always 
at  a  signal  from  the  deacon.  Each  now  signed  him- 
self with  the  cross,  saying.  In  no7nme  Patris,  etc,  etc. 
One  of  the  clergy  now  made  a  cross  on  the  fore- 
head of  each  male  candidate,  and  imposed  his  hands 
on  each  and  pronounced  the  formula  of  exorcism. 

^  For  its  terms,  see  Duchesne,  ib.  297. 


8o      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

He  then  repeated  the  same  thing  over  the  female 
candidates.  The  same  act  was  then  repeated  by 
two  other  exorcists  (a  form  is  given  by  Duchesne). 
The  catechumens  then  again  prostrated,  prayed, 
and  crossed  themselves,  while  a  priest  repeated  the 
ceremony  of  signing  the  cross  and  the  imposition 
of  hands,  and  said  a  short  prayer  (also  given  by 
Duchesne).  The  Mass  was  then  continued  as  far 
as  the  Gospel,  when  they  were  dismissed.  Their 
relations  or  sponsors  took  no  part  in  the  offering, 
but  the  names  of  the  latter  were  recited  in  the 
Memento^  while  those  of  the  elect  were  included  in 
the  Hanc  igitur  with  a  special  recommendation. 

The  exorcisms  were  repeated  in  the  same  way 
on  the  other  days  of  the  scrutiny,  except  the 
seventh.  On  the  third  scrutiny  the  candidates 
were  especially  instructed  in  the  Gospel,  the  Creed, 
the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  a  summary  of  the  Christian 
law.  This  was  the  fashion  at  Rome.  Elsewhere 
this  initiation  was  limited  to  the  Creed.  The  cere- 
mony was  known  as  "The  Opening  of  the  Ears," 
On  this  day,  after  the  Gradual,  four  deacons,  each 
one  carrying  the  Gospels,  marched  from  the  sacristy 
to  the  altar  and  placed  a  copy  of  them  on  each 
corner  of  it.  A  priest  then  expounded  the  nature 
of  the  Gospel.  The  candidates  then  stood  up  and 
listened  while  a  deacon  read  the  first  page  of  St. 
Matthew's  Gospel,  on  which  the  priest  offered  a 
short  commentary.  A  similar  passage  was  then 
read  from  each  of  the  other  Evangelists. 

After  the  delivery  {traditio)  of  the  Gospel  came 


BAPTISM  IN  SAINT  AUGUSTlNE^S  TIME     Bi 

that  of  the  Creed,  preceded  and  followed  by  an 
address  from  the  priest.  The  Creed  employed  was 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  which,  as  Duchesne  says,  is 
properly  the  Roman  symbol,  and  is  the  one  used  by 
St.  Augustine  of  Hippo  in  his  explanation  of  the 
ceremony. 

Then  followed  the  delivery  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer  by  the  priest,  who  preceded  it  by  a 
general  exhortation,  and  who  accompanied  it  by 
a  running  commentary  and  concluded  with  a  short 
address. 

The  seventh  and  last  scrutiny  took  place  on  the 
vigil  of  Easter,  and  according  to  MSS.  of  the  eighth 
century,  at  the  hour  of  Tierce — at  an  earlier  date  it 
was  probably  in  the  afternoon.  On  this  occasion  the 
exorcism  was  not  performed  by  one  of  the  inferior 
clergy  as  before,  but  by  the  priest  himself.  The  form 
of  the  last  exorcism  is  given  by  Duchesne,  op.  cit. 
p.  303.  After  this  there  followed  the  rite  of  the 
Effeta  (Epkpkala).  The  priest,  having  moistened 
his  finger  with  saliva,  touched  the  upper  part  of  the 
lip  [nares^)  and  the  ears  of  each  candidate.  This 
was  in  imitation  of  Christ's  action  in  curing-  the  deaf 
mute.     This  was  done  with  a  recognised  formula.^ 

The  candidates  then  laid  aside  their  garments, 
and  were  anointed  on  the  back  and  breast  with 
exorcised  oil.  The  whole  ceremony  had  a  symbol- 
ical meaning.  The  critical  moment  of  the  strife 
with   Satan    had    arrived.      Each    candidate    then 

^  On  the  meaning  of  the  word  as  here  used,  see  Duchesne,  ad  loc. 
^  Op.  cit.  304. 
6 


82      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTP:RBURY 

presented  himself  to  the  priest,  and  went  through 
the  process  of  formal  renunciation  thus  : — 

Do  you  renounce  Satan  ?  I  renounce. 

And  all  his  works  ?  I  renounce. 

And  all  his  pomps  ?  {pompis)     I  renounce. 
Each  one  then  read  the  text  of  the  Creed  [Reddiiio 
Symboli).     This  completed  the  ceremony,  and  they 
were  then  all  dismissed  by  the  archdeacon. 

In  regard  to  the  actual  baptism,  "  the  elect "  had 
to  be  present  at  the  solemn  vigil  of  Easter.  The 
Lections  used  at  that  time  at  the  ceremony,  which 
are  practically  the  same  in  all  the  Latin  rituals, 
included  some  of  the  finest  passages  in  the  Old 
Testament,  such  as  the  Creation,  the  Deluge,  the 
sacrifice  of  Isaac,  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  the 
vision  of  Ezekiel,  the  history  of  Jonah,  the  account 
of  the  image  set  up  by  Nebuchadnezzar ;  and  from 
the  prophets  that  in  which  Isaiah  predicts  baptism, 
and  extols  the  vine  of  the  Lord,  and  those  dealing 
with  the  covenant  of  Moses  and  the  institution  of 
the  Passover.  Each  Lection  was  followed  by  a 
prayer.  Canticles  such  as  the  song  of  Miriam 
{Canternus  Domino),  that  of  Isaiah  ( Vine  a  facta  est), 
that  in  Deuteronomy  [Attende  coehini  et  loquar), 
and  lastly  the  psalm,  SiaU  cervus  desiderat  ad 
fontes,  were  interspersed  among  the  Lections. 

At  the  appointed  hour  all  concerned  proceeded 
to  the  baptistery,  where  the  actual  ceremony  began 
by  a  hortatory  prayer.  Then  the  Bishop  exorcised 
the  water.  The  first  clause  of  one  of  these  exorcisms 
runs  thus  :  Exorcizo  te,  creatnra  aquae,  exorcizo  te 


BAPTISM  IN  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  TIME     83 

omnis  exercitus  diaboli,  omnis  potestas  adversaria, 
omnis  umbra  daemonum,  etc.  etc/  Then  followed 
a  Eucharistic  prayer,  in  the  middle  of  which  the 
chrism,  i.e.  oil  mixed  with  balsam,  was  infused 
into  the  water,  being  poured  into  it  crosswise,  and 
then  stirred  with  his  hand.  A  prayer  was  then 
recited,  imploring  the  grace  of  God  for  those  about 
to  enter  the  consecrated  water.  All  this  having 
been  done,  the  candidates  were  admitted  one  by 
one.  Each  one,  being  completely  divested  of  his 
clothing,^  took  up  his  position  facing  west,  and  was 
thrice  called  upon  to  renounce  the  devil  and  all  his 
pomps  and  vanities.  He  then  entered  the  water, 
where  he  was  required  to  affirm  his  belief  in  God  the 
Father  omnipotent,  in  Jesus  Christ  His  only  Son 
our  Lord,  and,  thirdly,  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Holy 
Church,  the  remission  of  sins,  and  the  resurrection 
of  the  flesh.     He  was  then  thrice  immersed.^     On 

^  Duchesne,  op.  cit.  322. 

-  On  this,  Duchesne  says  :  In  the  appendix  to  Mabillon's  Ordo,  i., 
one  of  the  lateral  chapels  of  the  baptistery  is  called  ad  S.Johannem 
ad  Vesiern.  It  was  probably  there  that  the  candidates  divested 
themselves  of  their  garments.  As  there  are  two  similar  chapels,  it 
is  possible  that  they  were  both  used,  one  for  the  men  and  the  other 
for  the  women.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remark  that,  in  spite 
of  the  direction  to  remove  all  clothing,  precautions  were  taken  so 
that  decency,  as  it  was  then  understood,  should  not  be  offended. 
The  deaconesses  had  here  an  important  part  to  play  in  connection 
with  the  baptism  of  women  {Const.  Ap.  III.  15  and  16).  It  must 
not  be  thought,  however,  that  propriety  in  ancient  times  was  as  easily 
offended  as  it  would  be  now  (Duchesne,  312,  note  2). 

^  This,  as  Duchesne  says,  did  not  imply  that  the  person  baptized 
was  entirely  plunged  in  the  water.  The  water  in  the  font  would  not 
reach  beyond  the  middle  of  an  adult.  He  was  placed  under  one  of 
the  openings  from  which  a  stream  issued,  or  else  the  water  was  taken 
from  the  font  itself  and  poured  over  his  head.  It  is  thus  baptism  is 
represented  in  early  monuments. 


84       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

leaving  the  water,  the  neophyte  was  led  to  the 
bishop,  who  made  the  sign  of  the  cross  on  his 
head  with  chrism,  reciting  the  proper  formulary. 
He  then  received  a  white  garment,  which  was 
handed  to  him  by  the  bishop.  The  godfathers 
and  godmothers  assisted  him  in  putting  on  his 
white  robe.  The  ceremony  ended  by  a  special 
prayer  and  the  imposition  of  hands.  The  newly 
baptized  then  returned  to  the  church,  where  the 
bishop  began  the  Mass,  at  which  he  or  she  partook.^ 

The  baptismal  ceremony  here  described  has 
much  that  is  imposing  and  even  attractive  about  it, 
and  was  likely  to  impress  a  simple  and  ingenuous 
people.  What  will  perhaps  surprise  some  who  are  not 
so  ingenuous  is  the  large  part  played  by  exorcism 
and  professional  exorcists  in  the  ritual  of  the  Sacra- 
ment of  Baptism  at  this  time,  and  the  conviction 
which  follows,  that  devils  were  then  thought  to  be  in 
possession  of  material  things  everywhere,  and  that 
before  the  water  or  the  salt  or  the  oil  could  be  used 
the  unamiable  tenants  of  these  objects  had  to  be 
evicted  by  charms  and  magical  forms  of  words, 
differing  little  or  nothing  in  essence  from  those 
similarly  employed  by  the  pagans  from  whom 
early  Christianity  borrowed  so  much. 

^thelberht  was  baptized,  according  to  the 
Canterbury  tradition  as  reported  by  Thomas  of 
Elmham,  on  Whitsun  Eve,  2nd  June  597.^  Gocelin 
rhetorically  refers  to  the  famous  ceremony  as  the 

^  Duchesne,  op.  cit.  chap.  ix. 
2  Op.  cit.  p.  78. 


BAPTISM  IN  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  TIME     85 

baptism  of  our  Constantine  by  our  Sylvester/ 
Dr.  Bright  aptly  mentions  the  singular  fact  that  on 
the  Sunday  morning  after  Pentecost  "the  noblest 
missionary  career  ever  accomplished  in  Britain  came 
to  an  end  in  the  distant  monastery  of  Icolmkill,"^ 
i.e.  the  death  of  St.  Columba. 

The  example  of  rulers  in  such  matters  is  very 
catching,  and  we  read  how  many  began  to  come 
together  and  to  abandon  the  pagan  rites  and  join 
the  Christian  community.  While  the  King  com- 
pelled none  to  imitate  him,  he  greatly  encouraged 
by  his  patronage  those  who  did  so,  for  his  teachers 
had  taught  him  that  Christ's  service  ought  to  be 
voluntary.^  In  this  they  were  following  the  repeated 
precept  of  Gregory.  According  to  the  very  late 
author,  Gocelin,  the  Kent  men  were  baptized  in  the 
Swale.  "  If  so,"  says  Bright,  "it  was  the  passage 
so-called  between  Sheppey  and  the  mainland,"  but 
Gocelin  afterwards  mixes  up  Augustine  with  Paul- 
inus,  many  of  whose  converts  were  probably  baptized 
in  the  Yorkshire  Swale.  Gocelin  further  adds  that 
the  numbers  were  so  great  that  the  baptism  was 
really  performed  by  a  vicarious  process,  the  water 
being  passed  on  by  two  and  two  from  the  original 
hand  of  Augustine  himself,  just  like  "holy  water" 
is  passed  on  to  whole  families  from  "the  stoup." 
This  great  baptismal  harvest  was  gathered  at 
Christmas,  597-598.  Duchesne  says  it  was  at 
Easter  that    baptism  was   ordinarily  administered, 

^  Vit.  Aug.  ch.  xxii.  ^  Op.  cit.  53. 

^  Bede^  i.  26. 


86       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

and  that,  too,  from  the  earliest  times.^  The  vigil 
of  Easter  was  devoted  to  this  ceremony.  If  this 
did  not  allow  sufficient  time  for  probation,  or  if  the 
neophyte  for  any  reason  could  not  participate  in 
the  initiation  on  that  day,  it  was  postponed  to  a 
later  date  in  Eastertide.  The  last  day,  that  of 
Pentecost,  as  much  on  account  of  its  being  the 
last  as  for  its  own  special  solemnity,  soon  came  to 
be  regarded  as  a  second  baptismal  festival.^  In  the 
East  the  Epiphany,  the  great  festival  of  the  birth 
of  Christ  and  that  of  His  baptism,  appeared  to 
be  naturally  indicated  for  the  second  birth,  the  re- 
generation, the  baptism  of  Christians.  .  .  .  The 
example  of  the  East  was  followed  by  several 
Western  Churches,  and  it  became  gradually  the 
custom  to  put  Christmas  and  several  other  festivals 
on  the  same  footing  as  the  Epiphany  in  this 
respect.^ 

1  Tertullian,  De  Bapt.  19.  2  op.  cit.  293.  ^  7^ 


CHAPTER    III 

The  baptism  of  the  King  and  the  adherence  of 
so  many  of  his  subjects  made  it  plain  that  the 
mission  had  been  an  abnormal  success,  and  no 
doubt  induced  Augustine  to  secure  for  himself  con- 
secration as  bishop,  in  order  that  the  Church  he 
had  founded  might  be  completely  organised.  Bede 
makes  him  go  to  Aries  to  be  consecrated,  and  there 
would  be  many  temptations  for  him  to  do  so,  for 
its  archbishop  was  the  Metropolitan  of  the  Frank 
realm.  He  makes  the  mistake,  however,  of  calling 
him  ^therius  instead  of  Vergilius.  I  am  not  quite 
sure  that  Gregory  went  to  Aries,  which  was  a  long 
way  off,  and  would  involve  leaving  his  infant  colony 
a  long  time  without  a  leader.  Gregory,  who  was 
in  constant  correspondence  with  the  Archbishop 
of  Aries,  and  in  fact  with  most  of  the  bishops  of 
Provence,  would  in  that  case  hardly  have  called 
the  consecrating  bishops  "  Bishops  of  Germany," 
as  he  does  in  his  letter  to  Eulogius.  This  phrase 
seems  to  me  to  refer  to  the  more  distinctly 
Prankish  bishops  of  Northern  Gaul,  and  probably 
to  those  within  the  kingdom  of  Soissons,  where 
there  then  reigned  Chlothaire,  cousin  of  Queen 
Bertha,  and  that  it  was  there  Augustine  sought  his 


88      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

consecration.  In  regard  to  the  service  used  on 
occasions  of  consecration,  the  important  portion  was, 
that,  after  a  prayer  on  behalf  of  the  candidate,  there 
followed  the  consecrating  prayer  beginning  Deus 
honorum  omnium,  which  was  said  by  the  presiding 
bishop,  generally  the  Metropolitan,  while  two  other 
bishops  held  the  open  book  of  the  Gospels  over 
the  head  of  the  candidate,  and  all  the  bishops 
present  placed  their  hands  upon  him.  Then  came 
the  anointing  of  the  hands,  with  a  prayer  beginning 
Unguantur  manus  istae  de  oleo  sanctificato  et 
chrismate  sanctificationis,  sicut  unxit  Samuel  David, 
in  7'egem  et  prophet  am} 

According  to  Thorn,  Augustine  was  consecrated 
on  Sunday,  the  i6th  of  November.  It  has  been 
argued  that  this  date  is  wrong,  since  in  597  the 
1 6th  of  November  was  not  a  Sunday.^  From  a 
letter  written  by  Gregory  to  Queen  Brunichildis,  it 
is  plain  that  he  was  a  bishop  in  September  597, 
since  in  it  the  Pope  calls  Augustine  fellow-bishop.^ 
As  we  shall  see  presently,  Augustine  was  certainly 
a  bishop  at  Christmas,  597-598. 

Bede  tells  us  that  upon  his  return  to  Britain 
(after  his  consecration),  Augustine  immediately 
{continud)  dispatched  the  presbyter  Laurence  (he 
was  doubtless  one  of  Augustine's  monks,  who  had 
been  ordained  a  priest,  and  who  was  his  suc- 
cessor at  Canterbury)  and  the  monk  Peter,  who 
was   the  first  abbot  of   St.   Augustine's,  to    Rome 

^  Duchesne,  372,  375.  '  See  Plummer,  vol.  ii.  p.  44,  note. 

^  E.  and  H.  viii.  4. 


SAINT  GREGORY'S  LETTER  TO  EULOGIUS     89 

to  inform  "the  blessed  Pontiff  Gregory"  that  the 
English  nation  had  adopted  the  Christian  faith,  and 
that  he  had  himself  been  made  bishop/     We  can- 
not doubt  that  it  was  this  mission  which  is  referred 
to  in  the  Pope's  letter  to  Eulogius,  the  Patriarch 
of  Alexandria,  in  which  he  mentions  letters  which 
had  just  arrived  telling  him  of  the  safety  and  work 
of  Augustine.      This  letter   was   dated    July    598. 
The  cheerful  phrases  of  the  Pope   deserve  to   be 
quoted.     "While  the  nation  of  the  Anglians,"  he 
says,   "placed  in  a  corner  of  the  world,   remained 
up  to  that  time  devoted  to  the  worship  of  stocks 
and  stones,   I  determined  through  the  aid  of  your 
prayers  to  send  to  it,  God  granting,  a  monk  of  my 
monastery   for  the   purpose  of  preaching,   and  he 
having  by  my  leave  i^data  a  7ne  licencia)  been  made 
bishop  by  the  bishops  of  Germany,  has  proceeded 
also  with  their  aid  to  the  end  of  the  world,  to  the 
aforesaid  nation  ;  and  already  letters  have  reached 
us  telling  us  of  his  safety  and  his  work,  to  the  effect 
that   he   and    they  who  went    with  him   were   re- 
splendent with  such  great  miracles  among  the  said 
people,  that  they  seemed  to  imitate  the  powers  of  the 
Apostles  in  the  signs  which  they  displayed.     More- 
over, at  the  solemnity  of  the  Lord's  Nativity,  which 
occurred    in   this  first   indiction    {quae   hac  prima 
indictio7ie  transada  est),  more  than  10,000  Anglians 
are  reported  to  have  been  baptized  by  the  same, 
our  brother  and  fellow-bishop."^ 

It  was  probably  at  this  time  that  Gregory  in- 

^  Dede,  i.  27.  *  E.  and  H.  viii.  29  ;  Barmby,  viii.  30. 


90       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

serted  a  passage  in  his  Magna  Moralia  alluding  to 
Augustine's  missionary  success,  and  showing  how 
much  he  had  it  at  heart.  He  says:  '' Ecce  lingua 
Britanniae  quae  7iil  aliud  noverat  quam  barbarum 
frendere,  jamdudum  in  Divinis  laudibus  Hebraeum 
coepit  Alleluja  resoitare''  ("Behold,"  he  says, 
"  the  language  of  Britain,  which  was  only  used  as 
barbarous  speech,  is  now  used  for  Divine  praises 
like  Hebrew  and  for  chanting  Allelujas").^  This 
clause  must  have  been  added  to  the  book  after  it 
was  otherwise  complete,  for  the  work  was  written 
before  Gregory  became  Pope. 

It  is  also  an  interesting  fact  that  Gregory  at- 
tributes the  performance  of  miracles  to  the  mission- 
aries, and  the  phrase  clearly  points  to  other  miracles 
than  those  of  wholesale  conversion.  Bede  tells 
us  the  King  behaved  generously  to  the  monks, 
gave  them  a  residence  to  live  in  at  Canterbury 
{datain  sibi  mansionem),  and  made  provision  for  their 
needs.^  Thorn,  on  what  authority  I  know  not,  says 
the  King  gave  up  his  royal  palace  as  a  residence  for 
the  monks,  and  built  himself  another  at  Reculver. 
This  is  most  doubtful,  for  it  was  not  the  habit  of 
the  Teutonic  chiefs  to  plant  themselves  in  the 
midst  of  Roman  towns  such  as  Durovernum. 
Augustine  is  nevertheless  said  by  Bede  to  have 
fixed  his  see  in  the  Royal  City  {in  regia  civitate)} 

It  is  a  rather  difficult  matter  to  understand  how 
Augustine  accommodated  his  new  position  as  bishop 

^  Op.  cit.  xxvii.  21  ;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  14. 

*  Op.  cit.  i.  ch.  xxvi,  ^  Op.  cit.  i.  ch.  xxxiii. 


SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  ADMINISTRATION     91 

to  his  old  one  as  a  monk.  It  would  seem,  at  all 
events,  that  on  his  new  appointment  he  ceased  to  be 
an  abbot,  and  one  of  his  old  companions,  the  above- 
named  Peter,  was  appointed  to  his  place.  It  is 
probable,  however,  that  he  continued  to  live  in  the 
monastery,  and,  so  far  as  we  know,  he  was  at  this 
time  a  bishop  without  any  secular  clergy,  save  the 
Prankish  interpreters  he  had  brought  with  him. 
His  diocese  [parockia)  was  co-extensive  with  the 
country  over  which  y^thelberht  held  sway,  and  all 
Anglian  Christians  within  those  bounds  were  in- 
cluded in  his  flock.  Nor  was  it  divided  into  lesser 
divisions,  much  less  into  parishes,  nor  were  there 
any  parish  churches.  The  diocese  was  worked  by 
his  old  friends  the  monks  pretty  much  in  the  way 
the  friars  worked  one  of  their  provinces  in  later  days, 
going  about  preaching,  mostly,  if  not  entirely,  in  the 
open  air,  and  in  addition  holding  periodical  gatherings 
for  baptizing  people.  He  now  probably  ordained 
some  of  his  monks  as  priests,  unless  he  made  use 
of  the  Prankish  priests  who  had  accompanied  him. 
Otherwise  there  must  have  been  some  difficulty 
in  performing  the  Mass  except  at  the  headquarters 
of  the  mission  at  Canterbury.  Anyhow,  it  is  probable 
that  nearly  all  the  converts  at  first  lived  in  Canter- 
bury or  near  to  it.  It  must  be  remembered,  again, 
that  the  Italian  monks  were  quite  ignorant  of  our 
tongue,  and  not  apt  at  learning  foreign  languages ; 
and  that  it  must  have  been  a  tedious  process  to 
have  the  Church's  dogmas  or  the  preacher's  pathos 
translated  by  interpreters  little  gifted  with  the  arts 


92       SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

of   rhetoric,    and    who  no    doubt    often    made    sad 
mistakes.^ 

One  thing  Augustine  would  probably  at  once 
set  about  providing,  namely,  a  cathedral  to  become 
the  great  centre  of  work  in  his  vast  and  unorganised 
diocese.  Let  us  now  try  and  picture  to  ourselves 
what  this  cathedral  was  like.  Unfortunately  no  part 
of  the  original  structure  remains.  We  are  told  by 
Bede  that  Augustine  found  an  old  ruined  church 
which  was  reputed  to  have  been  built  by  Roman 
Christians,  and  which  he  rededicated  to  St.  Saviour 
and  to  our  God  and  Lord  Jesus  Christ  {Sancti 
Salvatoris  Dei  et  Donmti  nostri  Jesti  Christi)} 
In  this  dedication  Augustine  imitated  that  of  the 
Lateran  Basilica  at  Rome,  which,  as  Dr.  Bright 
says,  he  knew  so  well  as  Gregory's  Cathedral. 
The  latter  was  then  the  first  in  rank  of  the 
churches  in  Rome,  perhaps  the  largest,  and  the 
mother  church  of  the  city  and  the  world.  Thus  it  is 
styled  in  the  inscription  on  either  side  of  the  door, 
"  Oi7iniu7n  urbis  et  or  bis  ecclesiarum  mater  et  caputs 
"Christ  Church,"  the  Cathedral  Church  of  Canter- 
bury, still  remains,  says  Bishop  Brown,  the  material 
first-fruits  of  Augustine's  mission,  the  outward  sign 
of  the  dedication  of  England  to  Jesus  Christ.^ 

..^Ifric,  on  coming  to  his  archbishopric  in  995, 
was  told  by  the  oldest  men  whom  he  could  con- 
sult,   that   it   was   hallowed   on    the    Mass-day    of 

^  The  fact  of  the  service  being  so  largely  in  an  unknown  tongue 
may,  however,  have  specially  impressed  people  addicted  to  magical 
formulas. 

^  Op.  cit.  i.  ch.  33.  3  Op.  cit.  122. 


CHRIST  CHURCH  CATHEDRAL,  CANTERBURY  93 

SS.  Primus  and  Felicianus,  i.e.  June  9/  Plummer 
argues  the  year  was  602  or  603.^  The  remains  of 
this  church  were  so  completely  uprooted  by  Lanfranc, 
when  he  rebuilt  it  after  1067,  that,  as  Willis  says, 
it  is  vain  to  look  to  the  present  building  for  the 
slightest  remains  of  the  Saxon  Cathedral.  We  have 
therefore  to  turn  elsewhere  if  we  are  to  recover  its 
plan  or  appearance. 

Fortunately,  we  have  a  description  of  it  as  it 
was  before  the  fire,  from  the  pen  of  Eadmer,  its 
"  Cantor "  or  Precentor,  who  had  seen  it  before 
its  destruction,  and  who  accompanied  Anselm  on 
his  visit  to  Rome.  It  is  preserved  in  a  tract 
by  Eadmer,  entitled  De  reliquiis  S.  Atidoeni,  etc. 
This  description  was  copied  and  commented  upon 
in  Professor  Willis'  masterly  account  of  the 
Cathedral  of  Canterbury.  Willis,  however,  treated 
the  church  which  Eadmer  had  seen,  and  which 
existed  in  1067,  as  the  same  church  which  had  been 
built  by  Augustine,  which  with  our  present  lights  is 
not  possible.  Four  hundred  and  sixty  years  had 
passed  since  Augustine's  days,  and  we  cannot  doubt 
that  during  that  time  the  church  had  been  greatly 
altered.  It  will  be  convenient  to  condense  Eadmer's 
account  as  given  by  Willis,  and  then  to  add  Mickle- 
thwaite's  comments  from  his  excellent  papers  on  the 
history  of  Saxon  architecture  in  the  ArchcBological 
Journal.     Eadmer  tells  us  the  Cathedral  Church  at 

^  See  the  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle,  MS.  F.  (a  Canterbury  book), 
sub  an.  995  ;  and  Bright,  op.  cit.  61,  note  2. 
^  Op.  cit.  vol.  ii.  p.  63. 


94      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Canterbury  was  arranged  in  some  parts  in  imitation 
of  the  Church  of  the  Blessed  Prince  of  the  Apostles, 
Peter.  This  statement,  Willis  says,  is  amply  con- 
firmed by  what  we  know  of  the  old  Church  of 
St.  Peter's  at  Rome,  of  which  plans  and  drawings 
are  preserved  in  the  Vatican. 

Mr.  Micklethwaite  says  that  St.  Augustine's 
Cathedral  Church  was  what  is  called  an  Italian 
basilica,  a  form  of  church  which  he  thus  describes  : 
"The  basilican  church  had  a  wide  nave  with  an 
aisle,  or  in  some  cases  two  aisles  on  each  side. 
At  one  end  of  the  nave  stood  the  altar,  raised 
upon  a  platform,  beneath  which  was  a  vault  called 
the  confessio.  Above  the  altar  was  a  great  arch, 
and  behind  it  an  apse.  A  space  before  the  altar 
was  enclosed  from  the  rest  of  the  nave  to  form  the 
choir  of  the  singers,  and  there  were  seats  against 
the  wall  round  the  apse  for  the  higher  clergy,  a 
chair  or  throne  for  the  bishop  being  in  the  middle. 
.  .  .  Entrance  to  the  confessio  from  the  church  was 
arranged  in  different  ways,  but  the  most  usual  was 
by  two  sets  of  stairs  outside  the  screen  of  the  choir, 
and  when  the  levels  allowed  of  it  there  was  a  window 
below  the  altar  through  which  the  confessio  might  be 
seen  into  from  the  church.  .  .  .  Every  church  had  not 
all  the  parts  here  described.  Sometimes  the  confessio 
was  left  out,  and  often  the  buildings  at  the  other  end 
were  curtailed,  reduced  to  a  single  portico  along  the 
front  of  the  church,  or  omitted  altogether."^ 

The  fashion  of  having  the  high  altar  at  the  west 

^  Arch.  Journal,  2nd  Series,  iii.  297. 


CHRIST  CHURCH  CATHEDRAL,  CANTERBURY  95 

end  is  still  followed  in  St.  Peter's  and  in  forty  other 
Roman  churches  (either  ancient  or  rebuilt),  with  the 
same  orientation  as  their  ancient  predecessors. 

The  altar  was  sometimes  turned  to  the  east, 
and  sometimes  to  the  west.  It  was  arranged  that 
the  celebrating  priest  should  face  to  the  east,  and 
it  was  held  indifferent  whether  he  stood  before  or 
behind  the  altar.^ 

Mr.  Micklethwaite  says  the  Cathedral  at  Canter- 
bury had  the  primitive  arrangement  of  the  Bishop's 
cathedra  or  chair  at  the  extreme  west  end,  and  an  altar 
in  front  of  it.  This  was  the  plan  of  the  original  basilica 
of  St.  Peter's  at  Rome,  and,  as  at  St.  Peter's,  there 
is  little  room  for  doubt  that  the  western  altar  was 
once  the  high  altar.  The  eastern  apse  with  its  choir 
was  added,  probably  in  an  extension  of  the  building, 
for  the  use  of  the  monks,  and  came  to  be  considered 
the  principal  altar  through  the  increased  importance 
of  the  monks,  who  gradually  made  the  whole  church 
their  own.^  The  eastern  apse  was  occupied  by  the 
presbytery,  which  was  on  a  higher  level  than  the 
floor  of  the  church,  and  extended  westwards  beyond 
the  apse.  Beneath  the  presbytery  was  a  crypt  or 
confessio,  the  floor  of  which  was  lower  than  the 
floor  of  the  nave.  The  entrance  to  the  crypt  was 
in  the  middle  below  the  presbytery,  and  on  either 
side  of  the  entrance  a  flight  of  steps  led  up  to  the 
presbytery.  An  altar  seems  to  have  stood  against 
the  wall  of  this  eastern  apse  (Micklethwaite  calls  it 
a  minor  altar),  and  another  altar  some  way  in  front 

^  Micklethwaite,  op.  cit.  297  and  298.  ^  Op.  cit.  296. 


96      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

of  it  on  the  chord  of  the  apse  below  a  wider  arch. 
Below,  in  front  of  the  presbytery,  was  the  enclosed 
choir  stretching  westwards.  We  have  no  evidence 
as  to  whether  the  nave  in  this  church  had  aisles  or 
not,  but  it  probably  had,  and  they  probably  extended 
from  end  to  end  of  the  church,  and  were  separated 
from  the  nave  either  by  columns  or  by  piers. 
Like  the  smaller  Roman  basilicas,  it  was  doubtless, 
as  Willis  says,  without  transepts.  It  is  pretty 
certain  that  it  had  a  porch  on  the  south  side,  and 
that  this  porch  was  the  same  described  by  Eadmer 
as  the  one  existing  at  the  time  of  the  fire.  The 
porch  formed  the  lowest  storey  of  a  tower,  and  there 
was  a  corresponding  tower  on  the  opposite  or  north 
side.  Both  projected  beyond  the  main  walls  of 
the  church.  Whether  the  two  towers  were  part  of 
the  original  building  is  doubtful.  In  regard  to  the 
south  tower,  Eadmer  tells  us  that  it  had  an  altar 
in  its  midst  (in  viedio  suo)  dedicated  to  the  blessed 
Pope  Gregory.  At  the  south  side  was  the  principal 
door  of  the  church,  "as  of  old,"  says  Eadmer,  "by 
the  English  so  even  now  it  is  called  '  the  Suthdure,' 
and  is  often  mentioned  by  the  name  in  the  law- 
books of  the  ancient  kings.  For  all  disputes  from 
the  whole  kingdom  which  cannot  be  legally  referred 
to  the  King's  Court,  or  to  the  hundreds,  or  counties, 
do  in  this  place  receive  judgment."  Opposite  to 
the  tower  on  the  north,  says  Eadmer,  the  other 
tower  was  built  in  honour  of  St.  Martin,  and  had 
about  it  cloisters  for  the  use  of  the  monks.  "And 
as  the  first  tower  was  devoted  to  legal  contentions 


-^ 


u 


o 


CHRIST  CHURCH  CATHEDRAL,  CANTERBURY  97 

and  judgments  of  the  world,  so  in  the  second  the 
younger  brethren  were  instructed  in  the  knowledge 
of  the  offices  of  the  Church  for  the  different  seasons, 
and  hours  of  the  day  and  night."  ^ 

What  "  the  elevation  "  of  the  original  Cathedral 
looked  like,  we  do  not  know.  The  episcopal  throne 
{cathedra  pontificalis),  Eadmer  tells  us,  was  con- 
structed with  handsome  workmanship  {decenti  opere), 
and  made  of  large  stones  and  cement  {ex  magnis 
lapidibus  et  cemento  constriictam),  and  was  contiguous 
to  the  outer  wall  of  the  church  and  remote  from  the 
Lord's  Table  {Dominica  mensa)}  Mr.  Micklethwaite 
says  the  marble  chair  still  used  by  the  archbishop 
may  be  the  one  which  stood  in  the  western  apse,  but 
it  seems  very  doubtful  if  it  could  have  survived  the 
two  fires  which  devastated  the  choir.  He  says  it  is 
of  Italian  design,  but  of  English  material,  and  if  not 
Saxon  may  be  the  work  of  that  Peter,  the  Roman 
citizen,  who  was  working  in  England  about  1280.^ 

The  interior  of  the  church  within  the  two  colon- 
nades was  divided  into  two  portions,  the  nave  and  choir. 
The  choir,  says  Eadmer,  extended  westward  into  the 
body  {aula)  of  the  church,  and  was  shut  out  from  the 
multitude  by  a  proper  enclosure.  Such  a  choir  was 
known  as  the  ritual  choir,  or  choir  of  the  singers. 

1  Willis,  Arch.  Hist.  Cant.  Cath.  9-1 1.  Professor  G.  Baldwin  Brown 
argues  forcibly  against  the  notion  that  the  towers  at  Canterbury  were 
parts  of  the  original  structure.  He  says  they  were  built  over  the  primi- 
tive porches,  adding  :  "  It  would  have  been  impossible  for  Romanized 
Britons  or  Saxon  Christians  of  the  past  generation  to  have  planned 
these  flanking  towers,  which  do  not  belong  to  the  architectural  ideas  of 
this  time,  but  lateral  porches  of  entrance  would  be  quite  in  accord- 
ance with  early  Saxon  habits  "  {Arts  in  Early  England,  ii.  157). 

2  Willis,  op.  cit.  12.  '  Op.  cit.  295-297. 

7 


98      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Mr.  Micklethwaite  holds,  as  I  have  said,  that  the 
eastern  half  of  the  church,  including  the  choir  of  the 
singers,  or  monk's  choir,  was  an  after  addition,  and 
that  Augustine's  Cathedral  was  thus  a  much  more 
modest  building  than  that  described  by  Eadmer. 

After  mentioning  the  building  of  the  cathedral, 
Bede  goes  on  to  say  that  Augustine  "proceeded  to 
build,  not  far  from  Canterbury  on  the  eastern  side, 
a  monastery  which,  at  his  request.  King  yEthelberht 
constructed  from  its  foundations  and  endowed  with 
various  gifts.  He  intended  its  Church  of  the  Blessed 
Apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  to  be  a  burying-place  for 
himself  and  all  succeeding  Bishops  of  Canterbury,  as 
also  of  the  Kings  of  Kent."  ^ 

Dean  Stanley  conjectures  that  the  monastery  was 
planted  outside  the  city  walls,  because  Augustine,  as 
Bede  says,  meant  it  to  be  a  burial-place  for  himself 
and  his  successors,  and  according  to  the  traditions  of 
old  Rome  the  dead  were  always  buried  outside  the 
walls.  This  was,  no  doubt,  an  excellent  reason.  A 
second  one  was,  that  the  primitive  settlement  of  the 
monks  was  already  planted  on  the  land  where  the 
Churches  of  St.  Martin  and  St.  Pancras  were  also 
situated.  I  shall  have  more  to  say  about  this  property 
of  the  monks  later  on.  The  dedication  of  the  church 
to  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  was  not  inappropriately 
changed  in  later  days  by  Dunstan  to  that  of  St. 
Augustine.  The  church  was  not  completed  at  the 
time  of  St.  Augustine's  death,  and  was  consecrated 
by  his  successor.     The  ruins  are  still  known  as  those 

^  Bede,  i.  33. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE   99 

of  St.  Augustine's.  Bede  tells  us  that  the  first 
abbot  of  this  monastery  was  Peter  (i.e.  the  same 
person  who  was  sent  as  his  envoy  to  the  Pope  by 
Augustine),  He  subsequently  went  to  Gaul  on 
some  mission,  and  was  drowned  in  the  inlet  called 
Amfleat  {i.e.  Ambleteuse),  where  James  11.  landed 
in  1689  o^  his  flight  from  England/  and  was  buried 
by  the  natives  in  an  unknown  spot  a  little  north  of 
Boulogne.  "  But  the  omnipotent  God,  in  order  to 
let  it  be  known  what  a  meritorious  person  he  was, 
caused  a  light  to  appear  nightly  over  his  grave.  There- 
upon the  neighbours  realised  that  he  was  a  saint  who 
was  buried  there.and  his  body  was  taken  up  and  buried 
in  the  church  at  Boulogne."^  Thomas  of  Elmham 
gives  his  epitaph,  and  says  he  was  succeeded  by  John, 
one  of  the  monks  who  had  come  with  Augustine.' 

Let  us  now  return  to  Augustine.  In  his  letter 
to  the  Pope  he  had  pointed  out  that  although 
the  harvest  was  plentiful  the  labourers  were  few, 
and  he  apparently  asked  him  to  send  him  some 
more  recruits  for  his  mission.*  He  also  asked 
him  to  give  him  counsel  in  regard  to  certain 
matters  of  difficulty  which  had  occurred,  which 
appeared  to  him  to  be  important.^ 

It  has  been  remarked  as  curious  that  there 
should  have  been  such  a  long  delay  in  the  Pope's 
answer.  The  messengers  sent  from  England  must 
have  been  in  Rome  for  three  years,  for  the  letters 
they  took  back  with  them  were    dated  June  601. 

^  Plummer's  Bede,  ii.  64.  ^  Bede,  i.  ch.  33. 

2  op.  cit.  p.  126.  *  Plummer's  Bede^  i.  29. 

'  lb.  i.  27. 


100     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

No  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  delay  has  been 
given.  The  fact  that  he  had  been  tormented  with 
gout,  which  is  given  as  an  excuse  in  the  preface  to 
his  answer  to  Augustine's  questions,  seems  very 
inadequate,  but  I  know  of  none  better.  At  length, 
weary  with  waiting,  the  missionaries  pleaded  that 
they  might  be  allowed  to  return,  and  duly  set  out.^ 
They  took  with  them  several  new  recruits  for  the 
mission.  Among  these  Bede  mentions  four  by 
name — Mellitus,  Justus,  Paulinus,  and  Rufinianus. 
The  former  three  became  the  first  bishops  of  London, 
Rochester,  and  York,  and  the  fourth,  abbot  of  St. 
Augustine's  Monastery  at  Canterbury.  There  pro- 
bably also  accompanied  the  monks  some  secular 
priests  skilled  in  teaching  music,  etc.,  and  suitable 
for  forming  the  staff  of  a  cathedral.  With  them 
the  Pope  also  sent  various  things  needed  for  public 
worship  and  the  service  of  the  church — sacred 
vessels,  altar  draperies,  church  ornaments,  vestments 
for  bishops  and  clergy,  relics  of  apostles  and  martyrs, 
together  with  many  books  {codices  plurimos)} 

When  Augustine  sent  his  two  messengers  to 
Rome,  he  entrusted  them  with  a  series  of  questions 
— "difficult  cases"  on  discipline  and  in  regard  to 
administration — upon  which  he  desired  the  Pope's 
counsel  and  advice.  To  these  Gregory  now  replied. 
Some  of  them  deal  with  the  unsavoury  details  of 
ceremonial  purity  and  the  secrets  of  married  life, 
which  priests  have  always  been  prone  to  pry  into 
and  to  discuss,  and  which  are  not  quite  profitable 

^  E.  and  H.  xi.  56a.  "^  Bede,  i.  29. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE  loi 

for  celibates  or  those  whom  they  profess  to  teach. 
The  Pope  answered  them  all  sensibly,  and  dealt 
with  the  more  difficult  ones  according  to  various 
precedents  chiefly  drawn  from  Levitical  enactments 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  did  not  flinch  from 
using  the  plain  phraseology  which  the  Latin  nations 
habitually  indulge  in  on  these  matters. 

There  has  been  much  discussion  as  to  the  genuine- 
ness of  these  questions  and  answers.  This  has  been 
due  largely  to  their  not  occurring  in  the  oldest  and 
most  reputable  of  the  collections  of  Gregory's  letters 
(i.e.  those  referred  to  by  Ewald  as  R.  C.  &  P.),  from 
which  their  absence  can,  however,  be  explained 
by  the  fact  that  in  more  than  one  case  the  Pope's 
answer  savoured  of  teaching  not  recognised  by  the 
Church.^  This  would  lead  to  their  being  cancelled 
from  the  official  record  of  Gregory's  correspond- 
ence. Duchesne,  in  his  Origines  dti  Culte  Chrdtien, 
p.  94,  declares  that  the  document  is  spurious, 
although  very  old,  but  his  reasons  are  quite  in- 
adequate  and    largely  subjective.^     The    evidence 

^  Vide  infra,  pp.  107-8. 

2  Two  English  Roman  Catholic  scholars  of  learning  and  reputa- 
tion, Abbot  Gasquet  and  Mr.  Edmund  Bishop,  wrote  a  dissertation 
which  was  read  at  Rome  during  the  Centenary  Celebration  in  1897  in 
honour  of  St.  Gregory,  but  was  not  printed,  and  in  which  they  replied 
to  Duchesne.  The  former  scholar  published  a  short  account  of 
this  in  the  Tablet,  for  8th  May  1897,  p.  738.  In  it  he  says:  "A 
writer  of  great  name,  and  one  whose  opinion  carries  great  weight, 
I  mean  the  Abbe  Duchesne,  at  present  head  of  the  ifecole  Frangaise 
de  Rome,  has  rejected  this  document  as  spurious  and  assigns  it  to  a 
later  date.  His  opinion  has  naturally  influenced  a  number  of  im- 
portant persons,  who  without  further  inquiry  have  accepted  this 
verdict  upon  the  strength  of  the  Abba's  words.  For  my  own  part,  I 
may  say  that  I  think  he  has  not  carefully  considered  the  matter,  and 


102     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

in  favour  of  the  letters  is  really  very  strong  ; 
may  I  say  overwhelming.^  They  are  given  at 
length  by  Bede,  which  is  an  excellent  guarantee 
of  their  genuineness,  and  it  seems  difficult  to  under- 
stand how  they  could  have  been  made  up,  or  who 
else  but  the  wise  Pope  could  have  composed  such 
prudent  answers  at  this  time,  and  they  were  no  doubt 
sent  to  Au2:ustine  with  the  other  documents  from 
Rome  by  Nothelm.  The  questions  and  answers, 
as  has  been  shown,  were  accepted  as  an  authority 
by  Pope  Zacharias  in  743,  by  St.  Boniface  in  736,^ 
by  Ecgbert  of  York  in  747,  and  by  the  Bishop  of 
Cambrai  in  826,  consequently  there  is  every  reason 
to  believe  them  genuine.  In  745,  Boniface,  Arch- 
bishop of  Mayence,  applied  for  a  copy  to  Nothelm, 
who  had  then  become  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  de- 

that  his  conclusion  is  based  upon  an  inadequate  knowledge  of  the 
Church  in  England  during  the  seventh  century,  and  a  false  notion 
about  the  ideas  of  St.  Gregory  upon  an  important  matter."  The 
Jesuit,  Father  Brou,  who  has  written  on  St.  Augustine,  takes  the 
same  viev/.  Hartmann  accepts  the  letters  as  genuine  {E.  and  H. 
ii.  p.  331,  etc.).  Mommsen  thinks  we  have  not  the  document  in 
full,  but  regards  it  as  a  set  of  notes  taken  down  by  the  priest 
Laurence  at  the  time.  Grisar  (S.J.,  Civ.  Cat.  1892,  ii.  46)  treats  the 
letters  as  genuine,  as  does  Jaffe  {Resgest.,  1885,  599).  A  notable 
piece  of  evidence  in  regard  to  their  reputed  genuineness  is  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  it  was  afterwards  found  necessary  to  forge 
a  correspondence  between  Gregory  and  Felix  of  Messina  to  try  and 
explain  away  Gregory's  pronouncement  in  regard  to  the  degrees 
within  which  lawful  marriage  was  allowed.  These  forged  letters  are 
excluded  by  Ewald  and  Hartmann,  who  do  not  even  name  them. 
That  of  the  Pope  is  rejected  as  a  forgery  by  Jaffe,  while  in  regard  to 
Felix  he  had  been  succeeded  as  Bishop  of  Messina  by  Donus,  in  595 
and  596,  before  Augustine's  questions  had  been  even  sent  (see 
Barmby,  Epp.  of  Gregory,  ii.  351  and  353,  notes).  The  suspected 
letters  are  given  in  John  the  Deacon's  Life  of  the  Pope. 

^  Op.  cit...  Preface,  pp.  vii  and  ix,  and  p.  67,  note. 

*  Man.  Mogunt,  88-94. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE  103 

daring  on  the  authority  of  the  secretaries  {scrinarii) 
that  they  were  not  then  entered  on  the  papal  registers 
[Qziia  in  scrinio  Romanae  ecclesiae,  ut  adfirfnant 
scrinarii,  cum  ceteris  exe77iplaribus  supra  dicti  ponti- 
Jicis  qtiaesita  non  inveniebatur)}  This  was  written 
in  736.*  He  therefore  wrote  to  Nothelm  to  supply 
him  with  copies  of  them.  They  occur  in  several 
early  collections  of  canons  which  have  been  col- 
lated for  Ewald  and  Hartmann's  collection,  as 
well  as  in  Bede.  In  these  collections  they  are 
preceded  by  a  short  preface  not  in  Bede,  which  it 
has  been  alleged  was  added  afterwards,  probably  in 
Italy,  and  which  differs  verbally  in  different  copies. 
Mr.  Plummer  says  he  is  strongly  of  opinion  that  it  is 
a  forgery.^  One  argument  against  it  is  that  Gregory 
never  refers  to  Saxons  and  Saxonia,  but  to  Angles 
and  Anglia,  while  the  title  of  the  preface  reads  : 
"  Here  begins  the  Epistle  of  the  Blessed  Gregory, 
Pope  of  the  City  of  Rome,  in  exposition  of  various 
matters,  which  he  sent  into  transmarine  Saxony  to 
Augustine,  whom  he  had  himself  sent  in  his  own 
stead  to  preach."  On  the  other  hand,  the  preface 
is  accepted  by  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  18  and  2)Z- 

After  acknowledg^inof  Auorustine's  letter  with 
the  questions  (which  had  been  delivered  to  him 
by  Laurence  the  priest  and  Peter  the  monk),  and 
adding  that  he  had   been    so   afflicted    with   gout, 

^  Boniface^  epist.  iii.  284. 

^  Nothelm  had  returned  with  the  letters  somewhere  between  715 
and  731,  so  that  it  was  between  these  dates  and  741  that  they  had 
disappeared  from  the  registers. 

8  Op.  cit.  ii.  45. 


104     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

and  that  they  had  been  so  anxious  to  return,  that 
he  had  not  had  time  to  reply  at  such  length  as 
he  had  wished,  he  goes  categorically  through  the 
questions.  Augustine's  brother-missionaries  were 
monks  and  not  secular  clergy,  and  it  seems  plain 
that  Saint  Gregory  meant  the  English  Church  to 
be  fashioned  on  a  monkish  basis,  as  his  own  house- 
hold had  been  when  he  was  the  Pope's  repre- 
sentative at  Constantinople.  Augustine  began  his 
questions  by  asking  how  bishops  should  live  with 
their  clergy  i^cum  suis  clericis  conversentur),  how 
the  offerings  of  the  faithful  were  to  be  divided,  and 
how  the  bishop  should  act  [agere)  in  the  Church. 
The  Pope  replied  by  referring  to  St.  Paul's  instruc- 
tions to  Timothy  advising  him  how  a  bishop  should 
act  in  such  a  case.  In  regard  to  alms,  he  said  the 
Holy  See  delivered  an  injunction  to  bishops  when 
they  were  ordained,  that  all  emoluments  should 
be  divided  into  four  parts,  one  for  the  bishop  and 
his  household  (for  hospitality  and  entertainment), 
a  second  for  the  clergy,  a  third  for  the  poor,  and 
a  fourth  for  maintaining  the  churches'  fabric  ;  but 
inasmuch  as  he  and  his  missionaries  were  regulars, 
and  had  to  live  in  common,  *'  they  ought  to  establish 
in  the  Anglian  Church  [in  ecclesia  Anghrum),  which 
was  still  but  newly  brought  to  the  faith  by  the 
motion  of  God,  that  manner  of  life  which  our  fathers 
used  in  the  beginning  of  the  infant  Church"  [i.e.  to 
follow  the  prescription  in  Acts  iv. ).  They  should 
have  no  private  property,  but  hold  all  things  in 
common — that  is  to  say,  the  provision  of  a  special 


ST.  GREGORY'S  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE  1 05 

portion  for  the  bishop  in  his  case  was  not  needed. 
The  use  of  the  term  "  Church  of  the  AngHans"  (i.e. 
of  the  EngHsh)  in  this  phrase  is  notable  as  the  first 
time  in  which,  so  far  as  we  know,  that  Church  was 
distinguished  by  a  special  name.  A  more  instructive 
use  of  the  term  occurs  in  the  second  answer,  where 
"  the  Use  of  the  Church  of  Rome  "  {Romanae  ecclesiae 
consuettidinem)  is  used  in  contrast  with  those  of  "  the 
Church  of  the  Gauls  or  any  other  Church  "  [sive 
in  Galliarum  sive  in  qualibet  ecclesia  ahqtiid\  and 
where  Gregory  goes  on  to  speak  again  of  the  Church 
of  the  Anglians  as  still  new  to  the  faith,  and  again, 
speaks  of  many  Churches  and  of  several  Churches. 
In  the  fourth  answer  he  again  speaks  of  the  Church 
of  the  Anglians.  In  his  account  of  the  mission  of 
Bishop  Mellitus  to  Rome,  Bede  speaks  de  neces- 
sariis  ecclesiae  A7iglorum  and  also  of  Anglorum 
ecclesiis}  Bishop  Brovyn  reminds  us  that  in  the 
Act  of  Supremacy  the  Church  of  England  was  called 
Ecclesia  Anglicana,  as  it  was  in  Magna  Charta.'^ 

Secondly,  in  regard  to  whether  clerics  not  in 
Sacred  Orders  {i.e.  below  the  sub-deacons,  and 
including  the  ostiary,  lector,  exorcist,  and  acolyte^) 
were  to  be  permitted  to  marry  if  they  could  not 
resist  the  inclination.  Following  the  steps  of  Leo 
the  Great,  Gregory  had  laid  down  that  sub-deacons 
might  not  marry.  Clerks  in  minor  orders  who 
married  were,  however,  clearly  expected  to  live 
separately  from  the  bishop  and  his  community,  and 

^  Bede,  ii.  4.  -  Augustine  and  His  Companions,  92. 

^  Bright,  64,  note. 


io6     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

to  have  separate  stipends.  They  were  to  be  kept 
under  ecclesiastical  rule,  and  to  live  good  lives, 
pure  from  things  unlawful,  and  pay  attention  to 
chanting  the  Psalms.  At  this  time  it  was  usual, 
as  it  is  now  in  certain  monasteries,  to  chant  the 
Psalms  from  memory,  without  using  a  book.^  This 
was  almost  essential  when  so  many  of  the  "  Hours" 
were  sung,  as  St.  Benedict  intended  them  to  be, 
at  night.  What  was  over  after  satisfying  the  needs 
of  the  Church,  was  to  be  given  in  alms. 

Thirdly,  in  regard  to  the  question  as  to  what 
"Use"  he  should  follow,  since  the  Use  of  Rome 
and  that  of  Gaul  were  different,  though  the  faith 
was  the  same,  Gregory  replied  that  Augustine  and 
his  fraternity  knew  the  Roman  Use  in  which  they 
had  been  brought  up,  but  he  should  be  pleased  if 
he  would  select  from  that  of  the  Gauls  or  any  other 
Church  what  was  most  suitable  and  acceptable  to 
God,  and  introduce  into  the  Church  of  the  Anglians, 
which  was  still  new  to  the  faith,  what  he  had  been 
able  to  gather,  that  was  edifying,  from  other 
Churches.  As  he  wisely  says,  "Things  are  not  to 
be  cherished  for  the  sake  of  places,  but  places  for 
the  sake  of  thinors."  He  concludes  his  answer 
thus :  "  From  all  the  several  Churches,  therefore, 
select  the  things  which  are  pious  and  religious  and 
right  [quae  pia,  quae  religiosa,  qtme  recta  sunt), 
and  gather  them  as  it  were  into  a  bundle  [quasi  in 
fasciculum),  and  store  them  in  the  mind  of  the 
English   {apud  Anglorum  mentes)  to  form   a   Use 

^  Smith,  Diet.  Chr.  Ant.  \\.  p.  1747. 


ST.  GREGORYS  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE  107 

(in  consuetudine  depone)''  Bright,  in  reference  to 
this  instruction,  says :  "In  Gaul  Augustine  had 
evidently  noticed  the  number  of  Collects  in  the 
Mass,  the  frequent  variations  of  the  Preface,  the 
Invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  Elements,  the 
solemn  episcopal  blessing  pronounced  after  the 
breaking  of  the  Bread,  and  before  the  '  Peace '  and 
the  Communion.  Gregory,  who  was  deeply  in- 
terested in  liturgical  questions,  and  had  revived  and 
re-edited  the  '  Sacramentary '  of  his  predecessor 
Gelasius,  and  brought  the  Eucharistic  ceremonial  to 
what  he  considered  an  elaborate  perfection  .  .  . 
nevertheless  advised  less  eclecticism."^  Such 
eclecticism  was  very  remote  from  the  modern 
ultramontane  theory,  and  accordingly  Duchesne* 
argues  "that  no  Pope,  no  one  imbued  with  the 
Roman  spirit,  could  have  given  the  advice  attributed 
to  Gregory  in  the  answer,"  and  he  suggests  that 
the  questions  and  answers  were,  in  fact,  invented 
by  Theodore.  This  view,  which  he  has  never 
withdrawn,^  is,  however,  purely  deductive  and  sub- 
jective, and  it  seems  to  me  that  any  one  who 
has  carefully  studied  Gregory's  writings  can  come 
to  no  other  conclusion  than  that  the  answer  is 
precisely  what  one  would  expect  from  him.  It 
was  the  inconvenience  of  the  answer,  and  of 
that  on  the  marriage  of  second  cousins,  etc.,  which 
perhaps  led  to  the  disappearance  of  these  "  Re- 
sponsiones "    from    the    papal    registers,    and    their 

^  Op.  cit.  64  and  65.  ^  Origines,  etc.,  94. 

*  Bright,  65,  note  2. 


io8     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

being  considered  by  some  ultramontane  champions 
as  forgeries.  Who  could  have  forged  them,  and 
on  whose  behalf  could  they  have  been  forged  ? 
Augustine's  predecessor  at  St.  Martin's,  Liudhard, 
doubtless  used  the  Gallican  liturgy.  Augustine 
did  not  apparently  avail  himself  of  the  Pope's 
licence  to  a  great  extent.  The  most  notable  change 
was  the  introduction  of  Rogation  Litanies,  which 
were  not  in  use  at  Rome  at  this  time,  and  were 
used  in  England  from  very  early  times.  Some 
changes  crept  into  the  English  liturgy  afterwards 
from  Gaul,  but  these  doubtless  came  later.  The 
Roman  or  Gregorian  "  cantus "  (chant)  was  also 
carefully  used  at  Canterbury,  and  its  use  became 
a  sign  of  adherence  to  the  Roman  obedience,  in 
opposition  to  the  Celtic  customs.^ 

Augustine  next  asked  what  punishment  was  to 
be  awarded  to  those  who  stole  from  a  church.  The 
Pope  replied  that  the  gravity  of  the  offence  differed 
as  greatly  as,  for  instance,  between  those  who  stole 
from  poverty  and  those  who  did  not,  and  that  the 
matter  must  be  left  to  the  good  sense  of  Augustine 
and  his  community ;  but  he  bade  them  always 
temper  justice  with  charity,  since  the  raison  d'etre 
of  earthly  punishment  was  to  save  a  man  from 
a  heavier  punishment  hereafter,  and  men  should 
be  corrected  as  children  by  their  father.  Things 
stolen  from  a  church  must  be  restored.  In  any 
case,  the  church  should  be  content  with  restitution, 
and   make   no  profit  out  of  a  theft    by  receiving 

^  Hunt,  Hist,  of  tJie  Eng.  Church,  etc.,  28. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE  109 

back  more  than  had  been  taken.  Augustine  next 
asked  if  two  whole  brothers  might  marry  two  sisters 
of  a  family  not  nearly  related  to  them  ;  which  the 
Pope  answered  in  the  affirmative,  since  nothing 
contrary  to  it  occurred  in  Holy  Writ.  He  next 
asked  within  what  degree  of  consanguinity  it  was 
permissible  to  marry,  and  whether  a  man  might 
marry  his  stepmother,  or  his  sister-in-law.  The 
Pope  pronounced  it  unlawful  for  cousins  to  marry, 
although  it  had  been  allowed  by  the  Roman  law, 
for  it  had  been  discovered  that  such  marriages 
were  unfertile,  but  it  was  permissible  for  those  in  the 
third  and  fourth  degree  of  affinity  to  marry.  The 
opinion  of  Gregory  here  given,  permitting  second 
cousins  to  marry,  was  not  apparently  generally 
received  by  the  orthodox,  and  gave  umbrage  in 
some  quarters,  and  it  was  probably  largely  because 
of  it,  that  the  answers  we  are  discussing  disappeared 
from  the  papal  registers. 

It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the 
Eastern  Church  permitted  these  marriages,  and 
Justinian's  Code  sanctioned  them ;  and,  as  Mr. 
Plummer  says,  as  late  as  1015  a.d.,  Gregory's 
permission  was  quoted  with  effect  against  Gerard, 
Bishop  of  Cambrai,  who  wished  to  prevent  the 
marriage  of  Rainer,  the  second  Count  of  Hainault, 
with  the  daughter  of  Hermann,  Count  of  Verdun.^ 
On  the  other  hand,  it  seems  from  a  canon  men- 
tioned by  St.  Boniface,  in  a  letter  to  Pope 
Zacharias  in  the  spring  of  742  a.d.,  that  Gregory's 

^  Pertz,  vi.  469 ;  Plummer's  Bede,  vol.  ii.  p.  48. 


no     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

indulgent  interpretation  of  the  rule  about  con- 
sanguineous marriage  was  not  generally  followed 
in  England.^ 

In  regard  to  marrying  a  stepmother,  the  law  of  the 
Church  was  well  settled,  and  Gregory  quoted  Gen. 
ii.  24,  and  Lev.  xviii.  7,  as  decisive  ;  but  the  practice 
was  very  common  with  the  Teutonic  heathens,  and, 
as  Mr.  Plummer  says,  Augustine  doubtless  wished 
to  have  his  hands  strengthened  in  view  of  difficulties 
which  presently  came,  and  were  then  probably  loom- 
ing. In  regard,  again,  to  marrying  a  sister-in-law 
the  Pope  was  equally  emphatic,  and  mentioned  how 
John  the  Baptist  was  put  to  death  for  maintaining  the 
Divine  law  on  the  subject.  "  Inasmuch,  however," 
said  the  judicial  Pope,  "as  many  of  the  Anglians  had 
contracted  these  marriages  before  their  conversion, 
theyshouldbeadmonishedtoabstain  from  each  other; 
but  they  should  not  be  deprived  of  the  Communion 
of  the  Lord's  body  and  blood  [corporis  et  sanguinis 
Domini  communione],  for  doing  what  they  had  bound 
themselves  to  do  before  their  baptism.  Those  who 
had  been  baptized  were  different,  and  if  they  per- 
petrated any  such  thing,  they  were  to  be  deprived  of 
the  Communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord 
[mark  the  words:    ''corporis  ac  sanguinis  Domini 

1  This  canon,  Boniface  claims,  had  been  passed  in  a  Synod,  held 
in  London  in  the  time  of  Gregory's  disciples,  Augustine,  Laurence, 
Justus,  and  Mellitus,  and  he  says  it  was  ordained  in  accordance  with 
Holy  Scripture,  at  that  Synod,  that  such  a  union  and  marriage  as 
the  Pope  was  supposed  to  have  sanctioned  was  a  great  sin  and 
incest,  etc.  {maximum  scelus  et  incestutn  et  horribile  flagitium  et 
damnabile  piaculum).  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  50  and  51  ;  see  also 
ib,  335-36. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE  1 1 1 

comntunione  privandi  sunt  "].  Two  brothers,  how- 
ever, might  marry  two  sisters." 

Augustine  had  asked  whether,  when  a  great 
distance  intervened  and  bishops  were  not  able  to 
assemble  easily,  a  priest  might  be  ordained  to  a  see 
by  a  single  bishop  without  the  intervention  of  other 
bishops.  To  this  the  Pope  replied  that  Augustine, 
being  the  only  bishop  among  the  Anglians, 
could  not  help  ordaining  a  bishop  without  other 
bishops  {non  aliter  nisi  sine  episcopis  potes\  "for," 
he  says,  "  when  do  bishops  come  to  you  from  Gaul 
to  attend  as  witnesses  {testes)  for  the  ordaining 
of  other  bishops  ? "  but  he  wished  him  to  ordain 
sufficient  bishops  in  England,  so  that  there  should  be 
no  obstacle  from  mere  length  of  the  way  interven- 
ing, to  prevent  them  coming  together  to  an  ordina- 
tion. He  urged  how  exceedingly  advantageous  the 
presence  of  other  pastors  was,  and  if  possible  three 
or  four  bishops  should  assemble  and  pour  forth 
prayers  for  the  protection  of  the  newly  consecrated. 

It  is  clear  from  this  answer  (as  Bright  says) 
that  Gregory  thought  consecration  by  one  bishop 
spiritually  valid,  but  irregular.  He  could  hardly 
have  done  otherwise,  since  at  Rome,  where  the 
earliest  tradition  seems  to  have  prevailed,  it 
was  always  the  practice  for  the  Pope,  when  con- 
secrating a  bishop,  to  do  so  alone  without  the 
assistance  of  others,  and  this  practice  of  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  must  have  been  familiar  to  Augustine. 
The  provision  which  had  been  made  at  the  Council 
of    Aries   (314),    that    if    possible    seven,    and   at 


1 1  2     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Nicaea  that  not  less  than  three  bishops  should 
be  present,  was  introduced  to  guard  against 
disorderly  and  clandestine  consecrations,  but  its 
observance  was  not  deemed  a  sine  qtia  non  for 
the  conferring  of  the  episcopal  character.^  This 
older  practice  apparently  also  prevailed  in  the 
Celtic  churches,  which  were  very  conservative.^ 
St.  Kentigern  is  said  to  have  been  consecrated  by 
a  single  bishop  from  Ireland,  '' 7nore  Britonum  et 
Scottorum  tunc  temporis.''  In  view  of  this  answer, 
it  will  be  remembered  how  very  positively  it  was 
asserted  in  later  times  that  no  consecration  was 
canonical  at  which  at  least  three  bishops  did  not 
concur. 

Augustine  having  asked  how  he  should  com- 
port himself  towards  the  bishops  of  the  Gauls  and 
the  "  Bri  tains  "  {Galliaruni  at  que  Brittaniarunt),  the 
Pope  replied  that  he  had  given  him  no  authority 
over  the  bishops  of  Gaul.  They  were  subject  to  the 
Bishop  of  Aries,  who  had  been  known  to  receive 
the  pallium  from  early  days,  and  he  bade  Augustine 
if  he  visited  Gaul  to  act  with  the  Bishop  of 
Aries  so  that  vices  among  the  bishops  there,  if 
any,  might  be  corrected,  and  if  any  were  luke- 
warm, he  might  fire  them  into  exertion.  He  adds 
that  he  had  written  to  the  Bishop  of  Aries  in 
the  same  strain.  He  was  to  have  no  power  of 
judging  the  bishops  of  Gaul,  for  he  should  not 
put    his    sickle   into    another's   corn.     As    to    the 

*  Bright,  op.  cit.  66  and  67. 

'See   Plummer,  Bede^  ii.  p.  49;   Haddan   and   Stubbs,  i.  155; 
Reeve,  Adamnan,  p.  349. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  RESPONSIONS  TO  AUGUSTINE  113 

British  bishops,  he  committed  them  to  his  care, 
so  that  the  unlearned  might  be  taught,  the  weak 
strengthened  by  persuasion,  and  the  perverse 
corrected  by  authority.^ 

The  eighth  question  was  as  to  whether  women 
could  be  lawfully  baptized  when  with  child. 
Gregory  replied  in  the  affirmative.  "Why,"  he 
asks,  "should  not  a  woman  with  child  be  baptized, 
when  it  is  no  sin  in  God's  eyes  to  be  fruitful?" 

Then  follow  some  questions  and  answers  re- 
lating to  intercourse  between  the  sexes.^  Those 
who  are  curious  about  such  morbid  matters 
may  find  them,  cloaked  in  friendly  Latin,  in  the 
original  texts  of  the  interrogatories  and  answers.^ 
They  are  excusable  only  on  the  ground  that 
the  Levitical  code  of  the  Jews  (which  is  quoted 
more  than  once  in  Gregory's  replies)  still  survived 
as  a  law  regulating  human  conduct.  Why  these 
clauses  in  it  should  be  deemed  valid  and  others  be 
treated  as  obsolete  has  never  been  logically  ex- 
plained.    I  follow  Mr.  Dudden  in  referring  to  one  of 

^  Between  the  seventh  and  eighth  responsions  the  later  editions  of 
St.  Gregory's  works  interpolate  a  question  and  answer,  not  in  Bede 
or  the  earlier  recensions  of  the  letters,  and  clearly  a  sophistication. 
Augustine,  in  this  document,  is  supposed  to  ask  the  Pope  to  send  him 
some  relics  of  St.  Sixtus  the  Martyr.  The  Pope  is  made  to  send  the 
relics  in  order  to  satisfy  the  people  who,  under  the  delusion  that  St. 
Sixtus  was  buried  in  a  certain  spot  in  Kent,  used  to  go  there  to  worship, 
but  no  miracles  had  in  fact  taken  place  there,  and  there  was  no  evi- 
dence that  the  martyr  had  been  buried  on  the  spot.  If  the  relics,  he 
said,  were  placed  there  the  people  would,  at  all  events,  have  something 
real  to  pay  their  devotions  to.     See  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  33,  note. 

^  A  portion  of  these  instructions  are  quoted  by  Ecgbert,  Archbishop 
of  York,  in  his  Penitential,  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  423  and  424 ; 
Mansi,  xii.  451.  ^  See  E.  and  H.  xi.  56a. 

8 


114     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Gregory's  answers,  as  proving  how  sane  and  sensible 
he  was  even  in  such  matters.  In  this  he  strongly 
deprecates  the  evil  custom  which  some  mothers  had 
adopted  of  entrusting  their  babies  to  other  women 
to  nurse,  and  disdaining  to  suckle  them  themselves.^ 

In  regard  to  Augustine's  questions  as  a  whole, 
Dr.  Bright  says:  "They  illustrate  his  monkish 
inexperience  of  pastoral  administration,  and  some 
of  them  give  the  notion  of  a  mind  cramped  by 
long  seclusion  and  somewhat  helpless  when  set  to 
act  in  a  wide  sphere.  His  difficulties  are  small 
and  pedantic  ones,  and  he  asks  no  guidance  in 
the  presence  of  spiritual  interests  and  requirements 
so  vast  and  so  absorbing." 

Besides  the  letters  and  the  answers  to  Augustine's 
questions,  the  returning  travellers  also  carried  with 
them  some  valuable  presents  from  the  Pope  for  the 
mission  Church. 

Thomas  of  Elmham  was  a  monk  of  St. 
Augustine's  Monastery,  He  has,  I  think,  been 
shown  by  Mr.  C.  Hardwicke  to  have  been  the 
author  of  the  Historia  Monaster ii  S.  Aicgttstini 
Cantuariensis.  He  was  treasurer  of  the  Abbey  in 
1407,  and  in  1414  left  the  regular  Benedictines  to 
join  the  more  austere  order  of  Cluny.  It  was  prob- 
ably in  that  year  that  the  work  just  cited,  as  far 
as  he  had  to  do  with  it,  ended.  He  has  also  been 
thought  by  some  to  be  the  author  of  the  famous 
Vita  et  Gesta  Henrici  Quinti. 

In  the  former  work,^  he  enumerates  the  books 

^  Dudden,  op,  cit.  ii.  135.  ^  Tit.  ii.  ch.  6. 


BOOKS  SENT  TO  AUGUSTINE  BY  ST.  GREGORY  1 1  5 

still  extant  associated  traditionally  with  the  names 
of  Gregory  and  Augustine,  which  he  calls  '' primitiae 
librorum  t otitis  ecclesiae  Ariglicanaey  ^  Some  of 
them  are  represented  in  a  coloured  drawing  in  the 
MS.  of  his  book  "^  as  placed  upon  a  ledge  immedi- 
ately above  the  high  altar  of  the  church.  He 
describes  a  number  of  them  in  some  detail  in  the 
text  of  his  work. 

The  books  in  question  are  also  referred  to  in 
a  short  paragraph  by  an  earlier  writer,  namely, 
William  Thorn,  whose  Chronica,  which  was  used 
by  Elmham,  ends  in  1397.  This  notice  runs  as 
follows:  '' Habonus  eiiam  Bibliain  Sancti  Gregorii 
et  Bvangelium  ejtisdem"  etc.^ 

There  are  several  extant  MSS.  which  correspond 
in  contents  and  pedigree  with  the  books  named  by 
Elmham,  more  than  one  of  which  may  with  con- 
siderable probability  have  been  sent  by  the  Pope 
to  his  missioner.  The  first  work  cited  by  Elmham 
he  calls  Biblia  Gregoriana,  and  says  it  was  in  two 
volumes,  of  which  the  first  one  had  on  its  first  folio 
De  Capihdis  Libri  Geneseos,  and  the  second  began 
with  the  prologue  of  Saint  Jerome  on  Isaiah.  In 
these  two  volumes  were  inserted  several  leaves, 
some  of  purple  and  others  of  rose  colour,  which 
showed  a  wonderful  reflection  when  held  up  to 
the  light.^  Thorn  speaks  of  this  Bible  a  few 
years  earlier  as  being  then  in  the  Library.^  In 
the  fifteenth-century  catalogue  of  St.  Augustine's 

^  op.  cit.  ed.  Hardwicke,  p.  99.        -  lb.  xxv.        '  Chron.  col.  1763. 
*  Op.  cit.  pp.  96  and  97.  *  Chron.  col.  1763. 


n6     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Library,  recently  edited  by  Dr.  James,  the  two 
first  headings  are  "Prima  pars  Bibliae  Sanctis 
GregoriV  and  ''  Secunda pars,''  etc/  Wanley^  says 
the  Bible  was  still  extant  in  1604,  being  mentioned 
in  a  petition  addressed  to  James  the  First.  In 
it  we  read  of  this  book:  "The  very  original 
Bible,  the  selfsame  Numero  which  St.  Gregory 
sent  on  with  our  Apostle,  St.  Augustine,  being 
as  yet  preserved  by  God's  special  providence." 
Wanley  does  not  seem  to  have  traced  the  book 
further,  nor  is  it  directly  mentioned  afterwards. 

There  is  a  book,  however,  in  the  Royal  Collec- 
tion, numbered  I.E.  vi.,  which  has  every  claim  to 
be  a  fragment  of  this  Bible,  In  the  first  place,  on 
a  fiy-leaf  which  is  about  five  hundred  years  old  we 
have  an  inscription  stating  that  it  then  belonged  to 
the  Monastery  of  St.  Augustine  at  Canterbury. 

Unfortunately,  it  at  present  consists  of  only  a 
mutilated  copy  of  the  Gospels,  but  it  very  clearly 
once  formed  part  of  a  whole  Bible,  as  appears  from 
the  numbering  of  its  quaternions,  the  first  of  which 
now  appears  at  the  foot  of  the  page  containing  the 
tenth  chapter  of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  and  is 
numbered  Ixxx,  while  the  last  page  of  St.  John's 
Gospel  bears  the  number  Ixxxviii  ;  and  both 
Professor  Westwood  and  Dr.  James  agree  that  it 
was  once  a  whole  Bible,  and  a  very  magnificent 
one.  It  exactly  agrees  with  Thomas  of  Elmham's 
description,  in  being  interspersed  with  a  number  of 

^  The  Ancient  Libraries  of  Canterbury  and  Dover ^  p.  197. 
2  Lib.  Vet,  Sept.  Cat.  172-173. 


BOOKS  SENT  TO  AUGUSTINE  BY  ST.  GREGORY  1 1 7 

purple  leaves  of  vellum.  There  can  be  no  reason- 
able doubt  that  it  is  a  fragment  of  the  very  Bible 
referred  to  by  Thorn  and  described  by  Thomas  of 
Elmham.  There  can  be  as  little  doubt  that  it  had 
nothing  to  do  with  Augustine  or  Gregory.  Its 
text  and  its  illuminations  are  Anglo-Saxon,  and  of 
the  purest  period  of  Anglo-Saxon  art,  dating  from 
perhaps  two,  or  even  three,  centuries  at  least  after 
Augustine's  time.  It  is  not  unnatural  that  such  a 
sumptuous  book  should  have  been  attributed  to 
such  a  source,  however,  by  those  who  were  little 
skilled  in  palaeography. 

Thomas  of  Elmham  next  mentions  a  Psalter, 
which  he  calls  Psalterium  Attgustini,  adding  ''quod 
sibimisit  idem  Gregorius."  He  describes  it  in  some 
detail,  and  gives  a  list  of  the  hymns,  etc.,  it  con- 
tains. He  also  mentions  a  second  Psalter,  placed 
on  the  table  of  the  High  Altar  {supra  tahdam 
tnagni  alta7'is  posituvi)  which  had  a  silver  cover 
with  fiorures  of  the  four  Evangrelists  on  it.  He 
ogives  a  lono-  list  of  the  contents  of  the  book — inter 
alia,  the  letter  of  Damasus  to  Jerome,  and  the 
latter's  answer,  and  other  interesting  entries.  Both 
these  Psalters  he  names  among  the  books  sent  by 
Pope  Gregory  to  Augustine.  Dr.  James,  in  re- 
ferring to  the  Cotton  MS.  Vesp,  A. i,  says  it  is 
a  claimant  for  the  position  of  one  of  these  two 
Psalters.  It  contains  Jerome's  Roman  version  of 
the  Psalms,  which  points  to  an  original  connection 
with  Rome.  "The  version,"  says  James,  "is  the 
one  Augustine  would   have    been   in   the  habit  of 


ii8     SAINT  AUGUSTLNE  OF  CANTERBURY 

using.  .  .  .  The  preliminary  matter  coincides  ex- 
actly with  that  noticed  by  Elmham  as  occurring  in 
the  second  of  the  two  Psalters  he  describes  ;  and 
with  that  second  Psalter,  in  regard  to  its  matter,  we 
may  very  confidently  identify  it,  as  Westwood  did, 
and  as  others  since  his  time  have  done." 

Professor  Westwood,  just  named  (a  very  com- 
petent authority),  made  an  elaborate  examination  of 
this  MS.,  and  it  seems  to  me  that  he  established  his 
case  in  regard  to  it ;  and  if  so,  he  proved  it  to  be 
a  monument  of  very  special  interest  for  us.  He 
showed  that  it  consisted  of  several  parts  and  several 
dates,  and  that  while  considerable  portions  of  it  were 
written  and  illuminated  in  England  at  an  early  date, 
other  parts  were  distinctly  of  Roman  origin,  and  he 
argues  that  these  latter  are  all  that  remain  of  the 
original  book,  which  may  well  have  been  brought 
with  him  by  Augustine  or  sent  to  him  by  Gregory. 
Large  parts  of  it,  having  become  decayed,  or  dis- 
carded because  they  were  not  sufficiently  attract- 
ive, were  replaced  by  others  in  a  more  ornate 
style  of  native  origin.  The  importance  of  the  book 
tempts  me  to  give  a  more  detailed  account  of  West- 
wood's  analysis  of  it. 

"  The  evidence,"  he  says,  "upon  which  this  MS. 
is  affirmed  to  have  been  sent  by  Pope  Gregory  to 
St.  Augustine,  is  to  a  certain  extent  satisfactory." 
He  then  quotes  the  description  of  it  by  Thomas 
of  Elmham,  with  which,  as  he  says,  it  perfectly 
agrees,  except  that,  when  he  wrote,  its  cover  was 
ornamented  with  the  effigy  of  Christ  and  the  four 


BOOKS  SENT  TO  AUGUSTINE  BY  ST.  GREGORY  1 1 9 

Evangelists.  "  The  text,"  he  continues,  "  is  written 
throughout  in  pure  Roman  uncials,  and  were  it  not 
for  the  illuminated  Anglo-Saxon  capitals  it  could  not 
be  distinguished  from  a  Roman  MS.  Mr.  Baber, 
indeed,  in  the  introduction  to  the  Wickliffe  New 
Testament,  says  that  it  is  written  in  the  thin  light 
hand  of  Italian  MSS.  .  .  .  From  the  very  careful 
examination  which  I  have  made  of  the  MS.,  I  do 
not  hesitate  to  affirm  that  a  portion  of  it  is  Roman, 
and  as  old,  or  older,  than  the  time  of  Augustine — 
namely,  those  leaves  which  are  written  in  the  rustic 
Roman  capitals,  with  the  words  indistinct.  The 
same  remark  may  also,  perhaps,  be  applied  to  the 
fourth  and  seven  following  leaves,  written  in  the 
more  elegant  rustic  capitals ;  and  I  have  no  hesita- 
tion in  suCTprestincr  that  the  text  of  the  Psalms  is  a 
copy  of  the  original  MS.,  purposely  decorated  with 
all  the  art  of  the  period,  and  in  the  spirit  of 
veneration,  introduced  into  the  place  of  the  old 
unornamented  Roman  MS.,  which,  moreover,  might 
probably  have  become  worn  out.^  This,  in  substance, 
was  the  opinion  of  that  very  experienced  palaeo- 
grapher Wanley,  who,  while  he  could  not  find  what 
he  sought  diligently  for,  namely,  the  original  Psalter 
of  St.  Augustine,  held  that  the  Cottonian  MS.  at 
present  occupying  us  was  a  copy  of  the  Gregorian 
Psalter  {icnde  alterum  alterius  apographum  fuisse 
facile  credo)}  Dr.  Westwood  also  partially  held  this 
view,  but  further  showed  that  while  Wanley's  descrip- 

^  Westwood,  Pal.  Sacra,  "  Psalter  of  Augustine,"  p.  6. 
^  Wanley,  in  Hickes'  Thesaurus,  ii.  173. 


120     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

tion  applies  to  a  large  part  of  the  MS.,  that  work 
also  contains  portions  of  the  original  book  itself. 

Returning  to  Thomas  of  Elmham,  he  tells  us  that 
in  the  Vestiary  {i.e.  answering  to  the  modern  vestry) 
there  was  a  Textus  Evangeliorimz,  in  the  beginning  of 
which  the  Ten  Canons  were  inserted.  It  was  called 
the  Textus  Sanctae  Mildi'edae,  because  a  certain 
rustic  in  Thanet  where  the  Saint  lived  having  sworn 
a  false  oath  upon  it,  had  become  blind.  In  the 
Library,  he  tells  us,  was  another  text  of  the  Gospels, 
in  which  the  Ten  Canons  with  a  prologue  were  in- 
serted, the  latter  beginning  with  the  words  Prologus 
Canommi}  Leland  refers  in  enthusiastic  terms  to 
two  copies  of  the  Gospels  he  saw  at  St.  Augustine's, 
which  were  doubtless  the  works  last  quoted.  He 
says,  speaking  of  "the  Gregorian  MSS."  :  ''Ex 
Latinis  auteni  codicibus  majusculis  Uteris  Romanis 
more  vetertmi  scriptis,  hi  etiam  nunc  extant,  incredi- 
bileni  prae  se  ferentes  antiqtdtatis  majestatem  ; 
videlicet  duo  volumina,  quatuor  Evangelia  complec- 
tentia,  sed  alius  guam  vulgaris  interpretationis."  ^ 

Dr.  Westwood  says  that  Wanley,  who  searched 
for  and  examined  the  MSS.  of  this  kingdom  with 
so  much  care,  was  led  to  believe  that  a  copy  of  the 
Gospels  preserved  in  the  library  of  Corpus  Christi 
College,  Cambridge  (No.  286),^  and  another  in  a 
similar  style  of  writing  in  the  Bodleian  Library,* 
are  the  two  identical  Gregorian  volumes  described 

1  Op.  cit.  p.  98, 

*  See  Preface  to  Thomas  of  Elmham,  xxvi. 

^  This  was  presented  by  Archbishop  Parker. 

*  Auct.  D.  ii.  14  ;  Bod.  857. 


BOOKS  SENT  TO  AUGUSTINE  BY  ST.  GREGORY  1 2  r 

above  ;  not  only  because  they  are  two  of  the  oldest 
Latin  MSS.,  written  in  pure  Roman  uncials  that 
exist  in  this  country,  but  also  because  they  contain 
Anglo-Saxon  entries,  now  a  thousand  years  old, 
which  connect  them  with  the  Monastery  of  St. 
Augustine  itself.  Dr.  Westwood  describes  them 
at  some  length. 

In  regard  to  the  Corpus  Christi  Gospels  here 
named,  Dr.  James  says  the  book  may  be  possibly 
identical  with  the  text  of  "St.  Mildred"  in  Elmham's 
notice.  "  The  date  of  it,"  he  says,  "  is  now  generally 
fixed  as  the  seventh  century,  and  though  it  can 
hardly  have  belonged  to  Augustine,  there  is  nothing 
to  prevent  us  from  supposing  it  to  have  been  brought 
to  England  by  some  such  person  as  Abbot  Hadrian." 
Dr.  James  quotes  a  notable  statement  by  Thorn, 
1770,  in  which  he  mentions  a  privilege  of  the 
abbey  copied  out  in  the  Gospel  book  of  Hadrian, 
^'  iranscriphtm  in  textu  Adriafti^^ 

In  regard  to  the  Bodleian  MS.,  Auct.  D.  ii.  14, 
Dr.  James  says  it  was  presented  by  Sir  Robert 
Cotton  in  1603,  and  is  written  in  uncials.  He  says 
of  it  that  it  contains  on  the  last  leaf  a  list  of  Anglo- 
Saxon  books  belonging  to  an  abbey  and  in  posses- 
sion of  various  members  of  it.  Among  them  is  one 
named  Baldwin  [Bealdevuine)  Abbas.  No  Baldwin, 
he  adds,  was  ever  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's,  but 
there  was  a  Baldwin  who  died  Abbot  of  Bury  St. 
Edmunds,  in  1098,  and  Mr.  Macray  has  suggested, 
with  great  probability,  that  he  may  be  the  person 
^  Op.  cit.  Ixvii,  note. 


122     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

here  meant.  Baldwin  of  Bury  came  from  the 
Abbey  of  St.  Denis,  and  may  perhaps  have 
brought  this,  which  is  a  foreign  book,   with  him.^ 

Lastly,  there  is  a  fragment  of  a  Gospel  book  in 
the  British  Museum,  Otho  C.5,  containing  Matthew 
and  Mark,  which  is  very  like  a  Corpus  Christi  MS., 
numbered  197,  containing  Luke  and  John.  "  It 
has  often  been  conjectured  that  the  two  originally 
formed  a  single  volume,  but  there  seem  to  be  some 
doubts  about  it.  That  the  latter  came  from 
Canterbury  is  attested  by  a  note  emanating  from 
Archbishop  Parker :  '  Bishop  Tanner  asserts,  we 
know  not  on  what  authority,  that  it  was  a  portion 
of  the  Gospels  of  St.  Felix,  the  Apostle  of  East 
Anglia,  otherwise  called  the  Red  Book  of  Eye.'  "^ 

It  would  seem  that,  of  these  various  books,  the 
only  two  which  have  a  strong  probability  behind 
them  attesting  a  pedigree  in  whole  or  in  part 
reaching  back  to  St.  Augustine,  are  the  so-called 
Augustine's    Psalter,    Cott.    Vesp.    A. i,^   and    the 

^  Op.  cit.  Ixviii  and  Ixix.  ^  lb.  Ixviii. 

'  The  following  is  a  list  of  the  contents  of  this  very  interesting 
volume,  as  given  by  Thomas  of  Elmham,  and  it  shows  how  early  in 
the  history  of  the  English  Church  a  very  fair  choice  of  books  and 
materials  for  studying  the  Psalter  had  reached  it.  He  says  it  had  on 
its  cover  an  image  of  Christ  and  others  of  the  four  Evangelists,  wrought 
in  silver,  and  continues :"/«...  primo  folio  incipit,  '  Omnzs  scrip- 
tura  divinitus  inspirata?  In  tertio  polio  incipit,  ^  Epistola  Damasi 
papae  ad  leronymum  '  et  in  fine  Versus  ejusdem  Datnasi;  ac  deinde 
'  Epistola  leronyini  ad  "  Damasum "  ctim  Hieronymi  versibus. 
Deinde  in  quarto  folio.,  *  De  origine  Psalmortim '  in  cujus  fine 
distinguit  Psalterium  in  quinque  libros.  .  .  .  In  qiiinto  folio  ejusdem 
Psalterii  sequitur  expositio  de  A  lleluj a  secundum  Hebraeos,  Chaldaeos, 
Syros  et  Latinos.  Item  interpretatio  '  Gloriae '  apud  Chaldaeos. 
Item  interpretatio  P salmi  cxviii.  per  singulas  literas.  In  sexto  folio 
sequitur  quando  psalli  vel  legi  debeat^  quomodo  Hieronymus  scribitj 


BOOKS  SENT  TO  AUGUSTINE  BY  ST.  GREGORY  i  2  3 

Corpus  Christi  Gospels,  but  they  all  form  a  very  in- 
teresting group,  some  of  which  may  well  be  treated 
as  dating  within  a  half-century,  or  little  more,  of 
the  orreat  mission, 

Elmham  mentions  three  other  books  which 
were  reputed  in  his  time  to  be  gifts  from  St.  Gregory 
to  Augustine,  all  of  which  were  put  upon  a  shelf  or 
table  on  the  high  altar  :  one  containing  an  account 
of  the  conflict  of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul  with 
Simon  Magus,  together  with  lives  and  passions  of 
some  of  the  Apostles.  It  had  a  cover  in  silver  upon 
it,  with  a  representation  of  Christ  standing  erect 
and  blessing  with  His  right  hand.  A  second 
one,  with  the  passions  of  the  Saints,  also  with 
a  silver-gilt  cover  with  a  representation  of  "the 
Majesty,"  studded  round  with  crystals  and  beryls. 
Thirdly,  one  containing  expositions  on  certain 
Gospels  and  Epistles.  Its  cover  had  a  great  beryl 
in  the  centre  with  many  crystal  stones  all  about  it. 

Dr.  James  says  of  these  three  books :  "  No 
attempt  has  ever  been  made,  so  far  as  I  know,  to 
show  that  any  of  them  still  exist,  and  I  have  no 
suggestion  to  offer  on  the  point."  ^  Their  magnificent 
bindings  would  make  them  welcome  plunder,  and 
it  may  well  be  they  were  all  three  destroyed.  In 
regard  to  the  sacred  vessels,  etc.,  which  Gregory 

item,  '  Ordo  Psalmorumper  A,  B,  C,  Z?.'  In  septimo  folio  de  Uteris 
Nebraeis,  quae  in  Psalterio  scribuntur.  In  octavo  folio,  '  Interpre- 
tatio  Psalmorum''  usque  ad  folium  undecimu?n  ubi  incipit  ^  Textus 
Psalterii,'  cum  imagine  Samuelis  sacerdotis,  et  in  fine  ejusdem 
Psalterii  sunt  Hymni  de  matutinis,  de  vesperis,  et  de  Dotninico 
die  "  {op.  cit.  tit.  par.  6). 
^  op.  cit.  Ixvii. 


124     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

is  supposed  to  have  sent  to  Augustine,  Elmham 
tells  us  they  had  all  disappeared  in  his  day.  He 
says  that  some  reported  they  were  hidden  during 
the  period  of  the  Danish  invasions,  and  had  not 
since  been  found.  Others  said  that  they  had 
been  employed  in  the  payment  of  the  ransom  of 
Richard  the  First  when  he  was  imprisoned  by 
the  Duke  of  Austria.  Others,  again,  held  that 
when  Egelsinus  the  Abbot  fled  to  Denmark 
(Dacia)  in  107 1  for  fear  of  William  the  Conqueror, 
who  confiscated  the  Abbey  with  all  its  contents, 
and  placed  a  monk  named  Scotlandus  over  it, 
these  precious  objects,  with  many  other  things, 
were  hidden  away  secretly,  and  their  whereabouts 
was  lost.^ 

Thorn  refers  to  certain  old  copes  [quasdam 
capas  veteres),  etc.,  which  had  been  sent  by  Gregory 
to  St.  Augustine  as  still  extant  in  his  time.  Of 
these,  according  to  Elmham,  six  copes  and  a  chas- 
uble remained  when  he  wrote.  All  were  of  silk. 
One  was  of  sapphire  or  azure  colour,  with  borders 
of  gold,  adorned  in  front,  in  the  upper  part,  with 
stones.  Two  were  of  purple,  in  other  respects  like 
that  just  mentioned.  Three  were  also  of  purple 
silk,  interwoven  in  parts  with  golden  and  milk- 
coloured  silk  threads  {aurei  ac  lactei  coloris),  while  in 
another  part  they  were  snow-white.  The  chasuble 
was  purple,  adorned  in  the  upper  part,  behind,  with 
gold  and  precious  stones.  He  points  out  that  the 
number  of  copes  corresponded  with  the  number 
^  op.  at.  ed,  Hardwicke,  loi. 


PRESENTS  SENT  BY  GREGORY  TO  AUGUSTINE  i  2  5 

of  those  who,  it  was  claimed,  had  brought  them — 
Mellitus,  Justus,  Paulinus,  and  Rufinianus,  together 
with  Laurence  the  priest  and  Peter  the  abbot.  It 
need  not  be  said  that  no  trace  of  these  vestments 
now  remains. 

Thomas  of  Elmham  also  refers  to  the  gifts  sent 
by  the  Pope  to  King  yEthelberht.^  He  derived  this 
information  from  a  spurious  charter  of  /Ethelberht. 
We  are  told  by  him  that  the  King  deposited 
some  of  these  gifts  in  the  Monastery  of  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul  (St.  Augustine's),  and  Mr.  Plummer 
says  very  rightly  that  the  tradition  may  be  true, 
though  the  charter  is  spurious.  They  include  a 
silver  dish  [missurium),  a  golden  flagon  {scapton), 
a  saddle  and  bridle  decorated  with  gold  and  gems, 
a  silver  speculum  or  looking-glass,  a  military  jacket 
entirely  made  of  silk  [arinilcaisia  oioserica),  and  an 
embroidered  shirt.^ 

Thomas  of  Elmham  enumerates  the  relics  extant 
in  his  time  at  St.  Augustine's  Abbey  which 
were  claimed  to  have  been  given  by  Gregory 
to  Augustine,  and  were  preserved  in  the  vestry. 
These  were  a  double  cross  [crux  geminata  sive 
duplicata),  which  he  says  was  called  bifurcata 
by  T.  Sprott  and  others — it  was  made  of  Christ's 
Rood  {de  ligno  Dominico) ;  part  of  the  seamless 
tunic  {de  tttnica  inconsutili),  some  of  the  hair  of 
Saint  Mary  {beatae  Mariae),  of  the  rod  of  Aaron, 
and  relics  of  the  apostles   and    martyrs,  etc.^     By 

^  Op.  cit.  tit.  ii.  II.  2  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  57. 

'  Op.  cit.  9. 


126     SAIiNT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

far  the  most  precious  gift,  however,  sent  by  the 
Pope  was  a  pall,  which  symbolised  and  was  meant 
to  convey  a  Metropolitan  jurisdiction  to  the  recently 
consecrated  Bishop  of  the  English.  A  few  supple- 
mentary remarks  to  those  made  on  the  pall  in  the 
life  of  St.  Gregory  ^  will  not  be  out  of  place. 

Pall,  or  pallium,  simply  means  cloak,  and  as  such 
Tertullian  recommends  it  as  more  convenient  than 
the  toga.^  "A  rich  form  of  it  became  part  of  the 
Imperial  attire,  and  was  granted  by  Emperors  as  a 
mark  of  honour  to  Patriarchs  and  others — thus  Valen- 
tinian  gave  a  pallium  of  white  wool  to  the  Bishop 
of  Ravenna.  Later  the  Popes  began  (originally  in 
the  Emperor's  name  or  by  his  desire)  to  allow  the 
use  of  the  pall  to  certain  bishops,  especially  to  those 
who  represented  the  Apostolic  See,  to  some  Metro- 
politans, or  to  other  prelates  of  influence  and  distinc- 
tion. I  n  Gregory's  time  it  was  thus  variously  granted, 
his  references  show  that  it  was  sometimes  rich  and 
heavy  with  ornament ;  it  was  not  to  be  worn  except  at 
Mass.  It  did  not  become  a  necessary  badge  of  the 
Metropolitan  dignity  till  later. "  ^  1 1  was  in  fact  at  first 
given  as  a  distinction  conferring  precedence  rather 
than  special  jurisdiction.  Originally  a  cloak,  it  ultim- 
ately lost  this  shape  and  became  a  symbolical  vestment 
rather  than  a  garment,  consisting  of  a  long  band  pass- 
ing round  the  shoulders,  with  its  pendant  ends  hang- 
ing down  behind  and  before,  so  that  the  front  and 
back  views  of  it  are  like  the  letter  Y.     It  was  orna- 

^  Vide  Gregory  the  Great^  p.  47.  2  ^lg  Pallio,  iii.  5. 

»  Bright,  68  and  69. 


THE  PALLIUM  SENT  TO  SAINT  AUGUSTINE    127 

merited  with  a  number  of  purple  crosses  (now  fixed  at 
four),  and  was  and  is  composed  of  the  wool  of  lambs 
reared  in  the  Convent  of  St.  Agnese  in  Rome  for 
the  purpose.  When  made,  the  palls  were  placed 
for  a  night  on  the  tomb  of  St.  Peter,  and  then  kept 
until  required.  The  Popes  presently  established  the 
principle  that  the  possession  of  the  pallium  was 
necessary  to  the  exercise  of  Metropolitan  functions, 
none  of  which  could  be  performed  till  it  was  re- 
ceived, and  Gregory  himself  seems  certainly  to  have 
treated  the  reception  of  the  pallium  as  necessary  to 
enable  Augustine  to  consecrate  bishops — qualiter 
episcopos  in  Brittania  constituere  debuisset  are  his 
words.  In  later  times  the  Popes  insisted  on  the 
archbishops  visiting  Rome  to  receive  their  palliums, 
as  they  insisted  on  their  right  to  confirm  the 
appointment  of  Metropolitans,  and  thus  exacted 
submission  to  themselves  as  the  price  of  their 
confirmation."  ^  Neither  of  the  two  immediate 
successors  of  Augustine,  Laurentius  or  Mellitus, 
received  the  pall,  which  probably  accounts  for 
their  not  having  consecrated  any  suffragans.^  In 
addition  to  the  pallium,  as  we  have  seen,  Gregory 
also  sent  all  such  things  as  were  necessary  for  the 
services  of  the  church,  including  (i)  sacred  vessels 
{vasa  sacra).  These  no  doubt  meant  silver  chalices 
and  patens,  such  as  he  sent  to  Venantius,  Bishop  of 
Luna  {calicem  argenteum  umi^n  kabente?n  uncias  vL, 
patenam  argentea7n  habentem  libras  ii.).^     (2)  Altar 

1  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  49  and  50.  -  Plummer,  ii.  79. 

^  E.  and  H.  viii.  5. 


128     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

clothes  {vestimenta  altarium).  Gregory  of  Tours, 
vii.  2  2,  speaks  of  the  altar  and  the  oblations  being 
covered  with  a  silken  vestment  {pallio  serico),  and 
in  the  letter  just  quoted,  written  by  Gregory  to 
Venantius,  he  speaks  of  sending  him  two  sindones, 
i.e.  linen  cloths  used  for  covering  the  loaves  offered 
by  the  faithful  for  the  Sacrament,  and  an  altar  cloth 
{coopertorium  super  altare).  (3)  Church  furniture 
[ornamenta  ecclesiarmn),  doubtless  including  candle- 
sticks, ewers,  etc.  etc.  ;  and  {4)  vestments  for  priests 
and  clerics.  In  July  599  Gregory  sent  some 
dalmatics  to  Aregius,  Bishop  of  Gap,  for  the  use  of 
his  deacon  and  archdeacon.^ 

Let  us  now  return  from  our  long-  digrression,  to 
the  travellers  who  were  returning  to  England  to 
recruit  and  reinforce  the  English  mission. 

It  would  seem  that,  after  they  had  been  a 
while  on  their  way,  they  were  overtaken  by  a 
messenger  from  the  Pope,  bearing  a  supplementary 
letter  for  Mellitus  the  Abbot.  In  this  letter  he 
gives  some  additional  counsel  as  to  how  Augustine 
was  to  deal  with  heathen  temples.  The  Pope  says 
he  had  been  in  great  suspense  since  the  departure 
of  the  travellers  from  not  having  heard  of  the 
success  of  their  journey.  He  bids  Mellitus  when 
he  reached  Augustine  tell  him  he  had  long 
been  considering  about  the  Anglians,  and  pro- 
ceeds to  modify  one  of  his  injunctions  to  King 
^thelberht  contained  in  the  letter^  he  had  sent 
him.     He  said  he    was  now  of  opinion    that  the 

*  E.  and  H.  ix.  219.  -  Vide  infra,  p.  135. 


GREGORY'S  ADVICE  ABOUT  PAGAN  CUSTOMS  129 

idol  temples  should  not  be  destroyed,  but  only  the 
idols  in  them  broken.  "  Rather,"  he  says,  "  let 
blessed  water  be  prepared  and  sprinkled  on  the 
temples,  and  let  them  build  altars  and  put  relics 
of  the  saints  in  them  ;  since  if  they  were  solidly  built 
they  would  be  most  useful,  and  it  would  be  merely 
converting  the  houses  of  demons  to  the  service  of 
God.  It  would  be  well  that  the  people  should,  in 
fact,  continue  to  worship  where  they  had  been  ac- 
customed,^ and  inasmuch  as  it  had  been  further 
customary  for  the  pagans  to  sacrifice  oxen  at  their 
services,  it  would  be  well  in  this  matter  also  not  to 
break  abruptly  with  old  traditions  ;  but  on  the  occa- 
sions of  the  dedication  of  the  churches,  or  the  nativity 
of  the  martyrs,  when  their  relics  were  exposed,  to 
build  booths  of  boughs  about  the  church,  and  there 
to  hold  religious  festivals  where  animals  might  be 
slain  to  the  praise  of  God  for  their  own  eating  ;  for," 


*  This  wise  injunction  of  the  Pope  probably  accounts  for  so  many 
of  the  older  country  churches  having  been  planted  on  sites  which 
were  probably  those  where  heathen  worship  had  previously  prevailed. 
This  adaptation  was  of  much  older  date  than  St.  Gregory.  Let  me 
quote  an  apt  note  from  Dr.  Bright:  "The  Irish  believed  that  St. 
Patrick,  finding  three  pillar  stones  which  were  connected  with  Irish 
paganism,  did  not  overthrow  them,  but  inscribed  on  them  the  names 
Jesus,  Soter,  Salvator"  (Stokes,  Trip.  Life,  i.  107).  A  Pictish  well, 
reputed  to  have  baneful  powers,  was  said  to  have  been  made  holy  by 
Columba's  blessing  and  touch  {Adamnan  Vit.  col.  ii.  11).  One  of 
the  boldest  acts  ever  done  on  this  principle  is  recorded  of  St.  Barbatus 
of  Benevento,  who  melted  down  a  golden  image  of  a  viper  which  the 
half-heathen  inhabitants  had  venerated,  and  made  a  paten  and  chalice 
out  of  it  (see  Bar.  Gould,  Lives  of  the  Saints,  Feb.  19  ;  Bright,  op.  cit. 
81,  note).  May  I  add  that  at  Dol,  and  other  places  in  Brittany,  the 
menhirs  and  dolmens  are  frequently  sanctified  by  being  marked  with 
a  cross,  while  the  presence  of  yew  trees  in  so  many  churchyards  is 
another  form  of  survival. 


130     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

says  the  wise  Pope,  "  it  is  not  well  to  make  people 
of  an  obstinate  turn  grow  better  by  leaps,  but  rather 
by  slow  steps,  as  the  Israelites  were  taught  in  the 
wilderness.  Thus  the  victims  formerly  dedicated  to 
demons  may  be  offered  to  God."  This  he  urges 
Mellitus  to  press  upon  Augustine,  and  he  concludes 
with  the  hope  that  God  would  keep  him  safe.^ 

Similar  feasts  to  those  here  referred  to  by  the 
Pope,  with  quite  a  pagan  flavour,  and  traceable 
to  the  same  survival  of  pagan  fashions,  were  no 
doubt  the  Whitsun  and  Church  ales,  and  the  May 
games ;  and  thus,  too,  it  came  about,  as  Bede 
says,^  "  people  now  call  the  Paschal  time  after  the 
goddess  Eostre."  Thus  Yule,  the  midwinter  feast, 
was  turned  into  a  synonym  of  Christmas,  and  the 
midsummer  festival  of  Balder  became  the  holiday 
of  the  eve  and  day  of  St.  John  the  Baptist.^  Bede^ 
distinctly  approves  of  the  conversion  of  the  lus- 
trations of  the  Lupercalia  into  the  Candlemas 
ceremonies  of  the  month  of  February.^  In  Syria 
the  cukus  of  the  sun -god  "H\io^  was  converted 
into  that  of  the  prophet  'HXi'a<i,  and  Welsh  saints 
named  Mabon  are  possibly  only  the  Celtic  Apollo 
Maponos  in  a  Christian  garb.^  Similarly,  we  have 
"pagan  superstitions  linked  to  Christian  holy  tides, 
as  the  eves  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  and  All 
Saints." 

The  so-called  rushbearings.  well  known  in  my 

^  Bede,  i.  30.  ^  De  Temp.  Ratione,  15. 

3  Bright,  op.  cif.  82,  note  2.  ■*  De  Temp.  Ratione,  c.  12. 

5  See  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  p.  60. 
^  Rhys,  Celtic  Britain,  302  ;  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  p.  60. 


THE  RUSHBEARINGS  OF  THE  NORTH   131 

memory  in  the  North,  are  another  example  of  these 
commemoration  feasts.  It  was  formerly  the  custom 
to  bring  fresh  rushes  at  the  feast  of  the  dedication 
of  the  church  with  which  to  strew  the  floors,  and  the 
supplying  of  bundles  of  rushes  for  this  purpose  is 
mentioned  in  many  church  accounts.  They  were 
used  to  keep  the  churches  cool  in  summer  and 
warm  in  winter  and  dry  at  all  times,  and  for  a 
pleasant  smell,  and  were  similarly  used  in  private 
houses.  Bridges,  in  his  history  of  Northampton, 
speaking  of  the  parish  of  Middleton  Chendent, 
says  it  was  the  custom  to  strew  the  church  in 
summer  with  hay  gathered  from  six  or  seven  swathes 
in  Ashmeadow,  which  was  grown  for  the  purpose, 
the  rector  finding  the  straw.  At  Norwich  Cathedral 
the  sweet-scented  flag  {^Acorus  Calamus)  was  used 
for  the  purpose.  Its  roots  when  bruised  gave  out 
a  powerful  and  fragrant  odour  like  that  of  myrtle. 

The  festival  was  especially  cultivated  in  my 
old  town  of  Rochdale,  and  is  described  in  some 
detail  in  a  letter  from  a  native  of  the  town  inserted 
in  Hone's  Year-Book,  pp.  1 105-6.  "Many  years 
before,"  he  says,  "the  rushes  were  carried  down 
to  the  church  on  men's  shoulders  in  bundles,  some 
plain  and  some  decked  with  ribands,  garlands, 
etc.  At  the  churchyard  they  were  dried,  and  the 
floor  of  the  church  was  then  strewn  with  them. 
This  was  before  the  floor  was  boarded.  They 
were  used  to  keep  the  feet  warm  from  the  clay  or 
stone  floors.  This  old  fashion  presently  gave  way 
to  a  more  elaborate  display,   in   which  the  rushes 


132     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

were  carried  in  a  cart,  and  were  cut  transversely 
and  laid  down  so  as  to  form  a  long  pyramid,  and 
the  cut  surface  of  the  rushes  was  then  decorated 
with  carnations  and  other  flowers,  in  devices  and 
surmounted  by  bunches  of  oak,  a  person  riding  at 
the  top.  The  cart  was  sometimes  drawn  by  horses 
and  sometimes  by  young  men  numbering  twenty  or 
thirty  couples,  adorned  with  ribands,  tinsel,  etc., 
preceded  by  a  man  with  horse  bells  and  playing 
the  part  of  a  comedian.  Then  followed  a  band  of 
music  or  a  set  of  morris  dancers,  followed  by  young 
women  carrying  garlands,  then  a  banner  of  silk 
of  various  colours  joined  by  narrow  riband  fretted, 
the  whole  profusely  covered  on  both  sides  with 
roses,  stars,  etc.,  of  tinsel.  The  whole  procession  was 
flanked  by  men  with  long  cart-whips  which  they 
continually  cracked." 

Let  us  now  revert  again  to  Mellitus  and  his 
companions. 

On  their  return  the  Pope  entrusted  them,  inter 
alia,  with  certain  commendatory  letters  which  were 
dated  in  June  60 1.  Among  them  was  one  written 
to  Vergilius,  Archbishop  of  Aries,  whom  he  asked 
to  succour  the  travellers  ;  "  and  since,"  he  adds, 
"it  often  happens  that  those  who  are  placed  at 
a  distance  learn  first  from  others  of  things  that 
require  amendment  "  {i.e.  "  Strangers  often  see  most 
of  the  game"),  "if  he  should  perchance  intimate  to 
your  Fraternity  any  faults  in  priests  and  others, 
do  you  in  concert  with  him  inquire  into  them  with 
all  subtle  investigation  {suptili  cuncta  investigatione\ 


LETTERS  SENT  WITH  MELLITUS  133 

and  do  you  both  show  yourselves  so  strict  and 
solicitous  against  thing's  that  offend  God  and 
provoke  Him  to  wrath,  that  for  the  amendment 
of  others  both  vengeance  may  strike  the  guilty 
and  false  report  not  afflict  the  innocent.  God 
keep  you  safe,  most  reverend  brother,"^  The 
Pope  still  seems  to  think  that  Canterbury  and 
Aries  were  sufficiently  near  to  each  other  for  the 
two  archbishops  to  take  counsel  together  at  times. 

A  second  letter  was  sent  to  Desiderius  of 
Vienne.  In  this  letter  he  specially  mentions 
Laurence  the  priest  and  Mellitus  the  abbot,  whom 
he  says  he  had  sent  to  his  most  reverend  brother 
and  co-bishop  Augustine  as  fellow-workers.^  To 
^therius.  Archbishop  of  Lyons,  he  wrote  a 
similar  letter,  asking  him  to  assist  the  missionaries.' 
He  sent  another  commendation  to  Aregius,  the 
Bishop  of  Gap.* 

With  these  individual  letters  to  the  more 
influential  prelates,  the  Pope  also  wrote  a  circular 
letter  addressed  to  several  bishops,  namely, 
Menas  of  Toulon,  Serenus  of  Marseilles,  Lupus 
of  Chalons-sur-Saone  (Cabellorum),  Agilfus  of 
Metz,  Simplicius  of  Paris,  Licinius  of  Angers, 
and  Melantius  of  Rouen,  in  which  he  tells  them 
that  such  a  multitude  of  the  Anglians  were  being 
converted  that  Augustine  had  informed  him  that 
he  had  not    sufficient   men    to    do  the  work,  and 

^  E.  and  H.  xi.  45  ;  Barmby,  xi.  68. 
^  E.  and  H.  xi.  34  ;  Barmby,  xi.  54. 
^  E.  and  H.  xi.  40  ;  Barmby,  xi.  56. 
*  E.  and  H.  xi.  42  ;  Barmby,  xi.  57. 


134     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

that  he,  the  Pope,  had  accordingly  sent  him  a 
few  more  monks,  with  Laurence  the  priest  and 
Mellitus  the  abbot,  and  asking  them  to  aid  the 
travellers  on  their  way/ 

Of  the  same  date  we  have  two  letters,  addressed 
to  the  boy-kings  Theodoric  of  Austrasia  and  Theode- 
bert  of  Burgundy.  In  these  letters  Gregory  acknow- 
ledges the  kind  services  formerly  rendered  by  them 
to  Augustine  and  his  fellow-travellers,  as  had  been 
reported  to  him  by  certain  monks  who  had  visited 
him  from  England,  i.e.  Laurence  and  his  com- 
panions, and  asks  them  to  extend  the  same 
favours  to  the  same  monks  on  their  return.'^ 
A  similar  letter,  dated  22nd  June  of  the  same 
year,  was  written  to  Queen  Brunichildis,  in 
which  we  have  the  same  fulsome  compliments 
as  before.  She  is  further  told  that  the  miracles 
hitherto  wrought  in  the  conversion  of  the  Anglians 
must  be  already  known  to  her,  and  asking  her  to 
aid  the  new  missionaries  now  on  their  way.^ 

We  also  have  a  letter  of  the  same  date 
addressed  to  Chlothaire  11.,  King  of  Neustria, 
who  resided  at  Soissons,  and  was  now  about 
eighteen  years  old.  In  this  the  Pope  acknow- 
ledges his  kindness  to  Augustine  and  his  com- 
panions, and  commends  Laurence  and  Mellitus 
and  their  companions  to  him.*  Armed  with  these 
various  letters,  the    new    recruits    for  the  English 

^  E.  and  //  xi.  41  ;  Baraiby,  xi.  58. 

2  E.  and  H.  xi.  47  and  50  ;  Barmby,  xi.  59  and  60. 

^  E.  and  H.  xi.  48  ;  Barmby,  xi.  62. 

■*  E.  and  H.  xi.  51  ;  Barmby,  xi.  61. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  LETTER  TO  ^THELBERHT  135 

mission  made  their  way  across  France,  and  reached 
England. 

Thither  they  also  took  letters  sent  by  the  Pope  ; 
among  them  was  one  addressed  to  King  yEthelberht 
himself,  whom  he  calls  Adilbertus — surely  a  romantic 
document,  the  first  one  in  which  a  Pope  addressed 
an  English  sovereign.  In  this  letter,  which  is  dated 
22nd  June  601,  Gregory  addresses  the  King  as 
"Glorious  Son"  {gloriose  Jili)  diXxd.  "Your  Glory" 
{vestra  gloria),  and  tells  him  to  keep  the  Grace 
which  had  been  given  him  by  God  {earn  quain 
accepisti  divinitus  gratia7n  sollicita  me}ite  custodi), 
and  how  he  had  been  set  over  the  nation  of  the 
Angles  in  order  that  benefits  might  be  conferred 
on  the  nation  subject  to  him.  He  bade  him  make 
haste  to  extend  the  Faith  among  the  people  subject 
to  him,  to  put  down  the  worship  of  idols,  to  over- 
turn their  temples,  and  to  build  up  his  subjects  in 
the  Faith  by  exhortation,  terror,  enticement,  cor- 
rection, and  example.  He  reminded  him  of  Con- 
stantine,  when  he  recalled  the  Roman  world  from 
the  worship  of  idols,  and  subjected  it  with  himself 
to  Christ,  and  of  the  fame  he  thereby  acquired  ; 
and  he  similarly  urged  him  to  infuse  into  the 
kings  and  peoples  subject  to  him  the  knowledge  of 
God  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  that  he  might 
surpass  the  ancient  kings  of  his  race  in  renown 
and  deserts.  He  then  went  on  to  commend 
to  him  "Augustine  the  Bishop,"  as  learned  in 
monastic  rule  {in  7)ionasterii  regula  edochis),  full 
of   knowledge    of    Holy    Scripture,    and    endowed 


136     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

with  good  works,  and  bade  him  listen  to  and 
follow  his  admonitions.  He  reminded  him  that 
the  end  of  the  present  world  was  at  hand,  and 
that  of  the  saints  about  to  begin — as  witnessed  by 
terrors  in  the  air,  terrors  from  heaven,  contrary 
seasons,  wars,  famine,  pestilence,  and  earthquakes 
in  divers  places ;  and  that  though  the  end  would 
not  come  in  their  days,  it  would  come  later.  He 
must  not  therefore  be  disturbed  by  such  portents, 
which  were  meant  to  make  us  more  zealous  in  good 
works.  He  promised  to  write  to  him  presently  at 
greater  length  after  the  more  perfected  conversion 
of  his  nation. 

He  finishes  by  saying  that  he  was  sending 
him  some  small  presents,  which  he  must  accept 
with  the  benediction  of  St.  Peter,  and  he  in- 
vokes Almighty  God  to  guard  and  perfect  him 
in  grace,  to  extend  his  life,  and  eventually  to 
receive  him  into   His  heavenly  congregation.^ 

In  another  letter,  addressed  to  Queen  Ethel- 
berga  (i.e.  Bertha  or  Bercta),  written  in  the  same 
month,  the  Pope  mentions  that  Laurence  the  priest 
and  Peter  the  monk  had  reported  how  she  had 
shown  great  kindness  toward  his  most  reverend 
brother  and  fellow-bishop,  Augustine,  and  succoured 
him  in  his  work,  and  he  blesses  Almighty  God  for 
having  reserved  the  conversion  of  the  Anglians  to 
be  her  reward.  He  compares  her  very  aptly  to 
the  Empress  Helena,  who  had  kindled  the  fire  of 
faith  in  the  heart  of  Constantine.     He  then  adds, 

^  E.  afid  H.  xi.  37  ;  Barmby,  xi.  66. 


ST.  GREGORY'S  LETTER  TO  QUEEN  BERTHA    i  37 

rather  enigmatically,  that  it  should  have  been  her 
duty  for  a  long  time  past  to  incline  the  heart  of 
her  husband  by  her  good  influence  and  excellent 
prudence  as  a  good  Christian,  to  have  predisposed 
him  to  follow  the  faith  (which  she  cherished) 
for  the  good  of  his  kingdom  and  his  own  soul,  to 
the  end  that  the  joys  of  heaven  might  be  the 
reward  of  his  and  the  nation's  conversion.  This 
should  have  been  neither  slow  of  accomplishment 
nor  difficult.  He  adds  that  now  was  a  suitable 
time,  and  she  should  begin  to  make  reparation  for 
wasted  years,  and  bids  her  strengthen  his  mind,  by 
continual  exhortation,  in  the  love  of  God  [men- 
tem  .  .  .  in  diledione  Christianae  .  .  .  roborate),  and 
kindle  his  heart  for  the  fullest  conversion  of  his 
nation.  Her  good  deeds,  he  tells  her,  were  known 
not  only  at  Rome  and  in  divers  places,  but  had  even 
come  to  the  ear  of  the  Most  Serene  Emperor  at  Con- 
stantinople. He  ends  by  commending  Augustine 
and  his  companions  to  her  care,  and,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  King,  with  wishing  her  temporal  and 
heavenly  blessings.  He  addresses  her  as  "Your 
Glory  "  {vestra  gloria)} 

From  some  of  the  phrases  in  this  letter  it  has 
been  not  reasonably  argued  that  ^thelberht's  con- 
version had  only  been  nominal  and  perfunctory. 
Dr.  Barmby  would  explain  it  by  supposing  that  the 
letter  has  been  dated  too  late,  and  that  the  King 
had  not  been  converted  at  all  when  it  was  written ; 
but  as  it  mentions  Laurence  and  Peter,  Augustine's 

'  E.  and  H,  xi.  35  ;  Barmby,  xi.  29. 


138     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

envoys,  and  also  calls  Augustine  a  bishop,  this  is 
hardly  possible,  and  Ewald  and  Hartmann  certainly 
date  the  letter  in  60  r.  The  Pope  probably  refers 
to  Bertha's  lack  of  zeal  in  the  days  before 
Augustine's  arrival. 

With  these  letters  to  the  King  and  Queen  of 
Kent,  Gregory  sent  others  to  Augustine  himself. 
In  one  of  them,  dated  the  ist  of  June  601,  and 
which  is  very  rhetorical,  and  full  of  scriptural 
quotations,  the  Pope  begins  by  apostrophising  the 
Saviour,  "  throuoh  whose  love  we  seek  in  Britain 
for  brethren  whom  we  knew  not,  and  by  whose 
gift  we  find  those  whom  without  knowing  them  we 
sought."  It  goes  on  to  speak  of  the  joy  that  sprang 
up  in  the  heart  of  all  the  faithful  at  Rome  when  the 
Anglians  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the  labours  of  the 
Fraternity  had  been  converted  to  the  True  Faith. 
As  Christ  had  chosen  unlettered  men  for  His 
disciples,  so  He  now  deigned  to  work  mighty  works 
(miracles)  among  the  Anglians  by  weak  men.  But 
while  there  was  ground  for  joy,  there  was  ground 
also  for  fear  of  undue  elation  ;  for  while  God  had  dis- 
played great  miracles  through  his  {i.e.  Augustine's) 
love  for  the  nation  which  He  had  willed  to  be  chosen, 
he  must  beware  of  presumption,  lest  while  exalted 
in  honour  outwardly  he  should  at  the  same  time  fall 
inwardly  into  vainglory.  This  maxim  he  presses 
home  by  some  apt  Bible  passages.  Because  he  had 
received  even  the  gift  of  doing  miracles,  Augustine 
must  never  forget  what  he  was,  and  must  treat  the 
honour  as  granted  not  for  himself,  but  for  the  sake 


ST.  GREGORY'S  LETTER  TO  ST.  AUGUSTINE    1 39 

of  those  he  had  been  sent  to  save.^  While  it  was  true 
that  the  apostles,  when  reporting  their  success  to  their 
Master,  said  that  even  the  devils  were  subject  to 
them  in  His  name,^  he  bade  them  not  rejoice  in  this, 
but  because  their  names  were  written  in  heaven.^ 
Gregory's  statement  in  this  letter,  that  Augustine 
had  wrought  miracles,  is  very  characteristic.  The 
only  miracle  distinctly  mentioned  by  Bede  was  the 
healing  of  a  blind  man  (ii.  2),^  but  he  (ii.  i)  implies 
that  others  of  the  mission  also  wrought  miracles. 
This  is  expressly  stated  by  Gocelin,^  who  needs 
a  very  small  excuse  for  amplifying  a  story  or 
legend.  In  another  letter  to  Augustine,  dated 
22nd  June  601,  the  Pope  sends  instructions  to  him 
how  he  wishes  him  to  organise  his  great  charge. 
"Inasmuch,"  he  says,  "as  the  new  Church  of  the 
Angles  has  been  brought  to  the  grace  of  Almighty 
God  through  His  bountifulness  and  thy  labours, 
we  grant  thee  the  use  of  the  pallium  (for  the 
solemnisation  of  Mass  only),  and  so  that  thou 
mayest  ordain  bishops  in  twelve  places  to  be  sub- 
ject to  thy  jurisdiction,  with  the  view  and  intention 
that  a  Bishop  of  London  should  be  always  elected 
in  future  by  his  own  synod,  and  receive  the  pallium 
from  the  Holy  and  Apostolical  See."  To  the  city 
of  York  (Eburacam)  the  Pope  desired  Augustine  to 
send  as  bishop  some  one  whom  he  might  judge  fit 
to  be  ordained,  so  that,  if  that  city  and  the  neigh- 
bouring districts  [aim  Jinilimis  locis)  should  receive 

^  E.  and  H.  xi.  36  ;  Barmby,  xi.  28.  2  Luke  x.  17. 

*  Luke  X.  20.  ■*  Vide  infra,  p.  162.  ^  Vit.  Aug.  20. 


I40     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  Word  of  God,  he  also  might  ordain  twelve 
bishops,  and  so  enjoy  the  dignity  of  a  Metropolitan. 
To  the  Bishop  of  York  also,  if  his  own  life  should 
be  prolonged  and  God  willed,  he  proposed  to  send 
the  pallium.  "  Nevertheless,"  continues  Gregory, 
"he  is  to  be  subjected  to  the  control  of  thy 
Fraternity,  but  after  thy  death  let  him  be  over  the 
bishops  whom  he  shall  have  ordained,  so  that  he 
shall  not  in  any  wise  be  subject  to  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  Bishop  of  London."  As  between  the  Bishops 
of  London  and  York,  he  who  was  first  ordained  was 
to  be  deemed  the  senior,  but  he  enjoined  that  they 
should  arrange  matters  which  might  have  to  be  done 
in  zeal  for  Christ,  with  a  common  counsel,  and  with 
concordant  action.  They  should  be  of  one  mind, 
and  work  without  disagreement  with  one  another. 

He  provided,  lastly,  that  all  the  bishops  whom 
either  he  or  the  Bishop  of  York  should  ordain  should 
be  subject  to  him  (Augustine)  during  his  life,  as  well 
as  all  the  "  sacerdotes  "  of  Britain,^  *'  so  that,"  as  he 
says,  "they  may  learn  the  form  of  right  belief  and 
good  living  from  the  tongue  and  life  of  thy  holi- 
ness." The  letter  is  dated  in  the  nineteenth  year 
of  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Mauricius  Tiberius, 
the  eighteenth  year  after  the  consulship  of  the 
same  lord,  and  on  the  loth  of  the  kalends  of  July, 
Indiction  4  {i.e.  22nd  June  601).^ 

^  Up  to  this  point  Gregory  had  designated  bishops  in  his  letters 
by  the  word  "episcopi."  He  now  applies  the  term  "sacerdotes"  to 
those  of  the  Britons.  Apparently  he  was  not  quite  certain  of  the 
status  of  the  bishops  in  the  British  Church. 

^  See  Bede,  i.  29  ;  E.  and  H.  xi.  39  ;  Barmby,  xi.  65. 


SAINT  GREGORY'S  CHURCH  REGULATIONS    141 

This  very  interesting  and  important  letter,  which 
had  most  far-reaching  consequences,  shows  the 
prudence  and  wisdom  of  the  great  Pope.  He  never 
contemplated  planting  a  Metropolitan  See  in  an 
obscure  village  in  Kent  which  by  accident  happened 
to  be  the  residence  and  capital  of  the  Kentish  King, 
but  in  the  midst  of  the  largest  and  most  important 
city  in  southern  England,  London,  where  it  ought, 
in  fact,  to  have  been ;  while  he  intended  that  a 
second  Metropolitan  should  be  placed  in  the  great 
city  on  the  Ouse,  York.  During  Augustine's  life 
his  dominion  over  the  whole  Christian  colony  which 
he  had  founded  was  not  to  be  disturbed,  but  after 
his  death  each  province  was  to  be  independent, 
and  the  precedence  of  the  two  Metropolitans  was 
to  be  governed  by  the  seniority  of  their  ordination. 
It  is  interesting  also  to  notice  that  the  Pope  provided 
(in  addition  to  the  regular  Provincial  Synods,  for 
which  he  makes  no  special  provision)  for  a  General 
Council  of  the  English  Church  to  be  held  as  required. 
As  Professor  Bright  again  says  :  "  He  contemplates, 
with  a  sanguine  hopefulness  as  to  the  probable 
extent  of  the  missionary  successes,  the  foundation 
of  twelve  dioceses  to  be  subject  to  Augustine  as 
Metropolitan,  so  that  the  Bishop  of  London,  meaning 
evidently  the  successor  of  St.  Augustine,  might  in 
future  be  always  consecrated  by  his  own  synod 
of  suffragans,  over  whom  he  was  to  preside  as 
Archbishop."^  In  a  well-known  letter,  written 
in  798  by  Coenwulf,  King  of  Mercia,  to  Pope 
1  Op.  cit.  75. 


142     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Leo  the  Third,  the  former  reminds  the  Pope  that 
Gregory  intended  London  to  be  the  Metropolitan 
See,  but  because  Augustine  died  and  was  buried 
at  Canterbury  it  seemed  good  to  the  Witan  or 
General  Council  {visuw  est  cttnctis  gentis  nostrae 
sapientibtis)  that  the  "Metropolitan  honour"  should 
abide  there.^ 

In  regard  to  these  regulations,  which  gave  rise 
to  bitter  feuds  and  litio-ation  in  later  times  between 
the  Sees  of  Canterbury,  London,  and  York,  Dean 
Stanley  has  some  interesting  remarks.  He  recalls 
the  fact  that  the  dioceses  in  England  are  so  much 
larger  than  abroad,  where  there  is  generally  a 
Bishop's  See  in  every  large  town,  and  a  bishop  is 
rather  like  an  incumbent  of  a  large  parish  than  a 
bishop.  This  peculiar  feature  in  England  arose 
from  Gregory's  order  to  divide  the  country  into 
twenty-four  bishoprics.  Britain  was  to  him  an 
unknown  island.  Probably  he  thought  it  might 
be  about  the  size  of  Sicily  or  Sardinia,  and  that 
twenty-four  bishops  would  suffice.  Hence  the 
great  size  of  the  English  bishoprics.  Eventually 
there  were  twelve  in  the  Archdiocese  of  Canterbury, 
but  only  four  in  that  of  York. 

The  concluding  paragraph  of  the  letter  we  are 
discussing,  in  which,  in  addition  to  the  bishops 
Gregory  had  constituted  for  the  English,  he  also 
puts  "all  the  bishops  of  Britain  "  {onmes  Brittaniae 
sacerdotes)  under  Augustine,  was  hardly  tactful. 

Among    the     famous    questions     put     by    St. 

^  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  522  ;  Bright,  op.  cit.  106,  note  4. 


ST.  GREGORY  AND  THE  CELTIC  CHURCHES    143 

Augustine  to  the  Pope,  the  eighth  one  dealt  with 
the  way  he  was  to  treat  the  British  bishops. 
The  Pope  knew  from  his  correspondence  with 
Columban  that  on  certain  matters  of  discipline 
and  practice  the  Celts  differed  from  the  standards 
recognised  at  Rome,  and  he  no  doubt  wished  that 
they  should  be  induced  to  conform,  since  very  often 
small  differences  of  ritual  and  practice  are  more 
conspicuous  and  cause  more  friction  than  larger 
differences  on  more  important  matters.  The  Pope 
made  a  great  difference  in  his  advice  to  Augustine 
in  regard  to  the  Prankish  and  British  bishops 
respectively.  While  he  bids  him  treat  the  former  as 
having  full  authority,  and  tells  him  that  he  must 
beware  of  encroaching  on  their  rights,  he  continues, 
"as  for  all  the  bishops  of  Britain,  we  commit  them 
to  your  care,  that  the  unlearned  may  be  taught,  the 
weak  strengthened  by  persuasion,  and  the  perverse 
corrected  by  authority."^  This  was  a  very  large 
"order."  It  was  one  which  his  messenger  and 
representative  had  not  the  necessary  gifts  to  make 
palatable  and  acceptable  to  an  obstinate,  proud, 
conservative  race,  which  had  lately  steered  its  own 
fortunes  independently,  and  whose  dealings  with 
Rome  had  been  too  sporadic  and  few  for  a  long 
time,  to  make  such  a  course  acceptable,  unless  it 
was  presented  in  a  very  gentle  and  attractive 
way.  This  claim  of  supremacy  Augustine,  with 
the  aid  of  ^thelberht,  now  proceeded  to  try  and 
enforce,   but    with   very  scant  success   due  largely 

1  Bede^  i,  ch.  27  ;  Resp.  7. 


144     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

to  his  tactlessness  and  arrogance.  Haddan  says  : 
"There  is  little  or  no  evidence  that  the  Celtic 
Church  was  in  antagonism  to  either  the  Roman  or 
any  other  Church  before  Augustine  made  it  so. 
It  had  been  simply  severed  by  distance  and  by  a 
broad  barrier  of  heathenism "  (and  may  I  add  of 
Arianism)  "  from  any  practical  communication  with 
other  Churches,  and  had  developed  accordingly  after 
its  own  inward  powers."  It  had  remained  largely  as 
it  was,  while  Rome  had  grown.  By  leaving  Caerleon 
alone  when  he  provided  for  the  foundation  of  the 
sees  of  London  and  York,  Gregory  showed  that 
he  did  not  wish  to  interfere  with  the  Church  of 
Wales  beyond  making  the  Bishop  of  London  (where 
he  had  intended  that  the  southern  archbishop  should 
have  his  see)  its  Metropolitan,  as  he  may  have  been 
before  the  Romans  left  the  island.  If  Augustine 
had  followed  the  policy  of  his  master  and  teacher 
Gregory,  instead  of  insisting  so  much  on  an  accept- 
ance of  the  Roman  rite,  there  would  probably  have 
been  no  prolonged  and  bitter  feeling.  As  we  can 
see  from  the  letters  of  Columban  to  Gregory,  there 
was  no  ill-feeling  towards  the  patriarchal  jurisdic- 
tion of  Rome  as  such  among  the  Celts.  It  was 
to  Augustine  as  Archbishop  and  not  to  Gregory 
as  Pope  that  the  Welsh  took  exception. 

The  greatest  of  the  Celtic  monk-theologians 
had  no  hesitation  in  speaking  to  the  Pope  in 
very  deferential  terms.  In  his  letter  to  Gregory, 
Columban,  who  was  an  Irish  monk  living  at  the 
monastery  he  had  founded  at  Luxeuil,  in  the  Vosges 


LETTER  OF  COLUMB AN  TO  SAINT  GREGORY    1 4  5 

mountains  in  Burgundy,  doubtless  represents  the 
point  of  view  taken  by  the  Celts  generally  of  the 
Pope's  jurisdiction.  He  calls  him  "  Holy  Lord  and 
Father  in  Christ,"  and  "  Holy  Pope,"  and  says : 
"It  does  not  befit  my  place  or  rank  to  suggest 
anything  in  the  way  of  discussion  to  thy  great 
authority,  nor  that  my  Western  letters  should  ridi- 
culously solicit  thee,  who  sittest  legitimately  on  the 
seat  of  the  Apostle  and  Keybearer,  Peter";  but  he 
adds  :  "  Consider  not  so  much  worthless  me,  in  this 
matter  as  many  masters,  both  departed  and  now 
living."  He  specially  refers  to  St.  Jerome,  and  bids 
him  take  heed  not  to  create  a  dissonance  between 
himself  and  that  great  man,  "lest  we  should  be  on 
all  sides  in  a  strait  as  to  whether  we  should  agree 
with  thee  or  with  him,"  and  he  bids  him  further 
beware  of  creating  the  scandal  of  diversity.  "  For," 
he  says,  "  I  frankly  acknowledge  to  thee  that  any 
one  who  goes  against  the  authority  of  Saint  Jerome 
will  be  one  to  be  repudiated  as  a  heretic  among 
the  Churches  of  the  West,  since  they  accommodate 
their  faith  in  all  respects  unhesitatingly  to  him  with 
regard  to  the  Divine  Scriptures."  ^  Dr.  Barmby 
says  very  truly  that  in  this  letter,  as  also  in  a 
subsequent  one  written  to  Pope  Boniface  iv.  on 
the  same  subject,  "though  addressing  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  in  language  of  the  utmost  deference  and 
recognising  his  high  position,  he  shows  no  disposi- 
tion to  submit  unreservedly  to  his  authority."^ 

^  See  Barniby's  Epistles  of  Gregory^  ix.  127. 
^  lb.  vol.  ii.  p.  282,  note. 
10 


146     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

There  were  several  matters  In  which  the  Celtic 
Churches  followed  another  "  Use  "  than  the  Roman 
one,  and  the  want  of  conformity  was  no  doubt  a 
grave  inconvenience  in  view  of  the  common  enemy, 
the  surrounding  pagans  ;  and  it  was  natural  that  the 
Pope  and  his  missionary  should  wish  to  bring  the 
two  usages  into  agreement  if  possible.  The  matters 
which  were  deemed  serious  were,  in  fact,  three. 

The  first  one  had  regard  to  the  time  of  cele- 
bratinof  the  sfreat  Paschal  festival  which  com- 
memorates  the  Resurrection  of  the  Saviour.  This 
festival,  it  was  universally  agreed,  should  be  pre- 
ceded by  a  fast,  and  the  fast  and  festival 
together  formed  the  Christian  Passover,  and  corre- 
sponded with  the  Passover  of  the  Jews. 

The  Jewish  rule  was  to  kill  their  Passover 
on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month  Nisan, 
entirely  irrespective  of  what  day  of  the  week  it 
was,  and  certain  Christians,  especially  the  Church 
of  Ephesus  and  its  daughters,  therefore  held  that 
this  fourteenth  day  was  obligatory,  and  were  known 
as  Quartodecimans  in  consequence.  Inasmuch 
as  Christ  rose  from  the  dead  on  the  first  day  of 
the  week,  it  was  held  by  the  rest  of  the  Christian 
world  that  the  Feast  of  the  Resurrection  ought  to 
be  always  on  a  Sunday,  irrespective  of  its  being  any 
particular  day  of  the  month,  and  so  it  was  decided 
by  the  Council  of  Nicsea.  According  to  Con- 
stantine's  letter  written  after  the  Nicene  Council 
(the  decree  of  which  on  the  subject  is  lost),  that 
famous  synod  also  decided  that  under  no  circum- 


THE  CELTIC  DATING  OF  EASTER        147 

stances  should  the  Christian  Easter  Day  coincide 
with  the  Jewish  Passover.  This  excluded  the  four- 
teenth of  the  month  as  a  possible  Easter  Day  under 
all  circumstances. 

As  Dr.  Bright  says,  it  was  ordained  (at  Nicaea) 
that  Easter  Sunday  should  always  and  everywhere  be 
a  Sunday /o //owing-  the  Equinox,  which  would  imply 
that  it  should  similarly  follow  and  never  coincide 
with  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  Paschal  month.  .  .  . 
According  to  the  orthodox  reckoning,  the  fifteenth 
was  the  first  day  of  the  month  which  could  legitim- 
ately be  an  Easter  Sunday ;  this  method,  starting  at 
the  fifteenth  and  going  on  to  the  twenty-first  as  limits, 
kept  clear  of  the  Jewish  day.  In  case  the  fourteenth 
day  of  the  Paschal  month  happened  to  be  a  Sunday, 
the  Easter  celebration  was  deferred  to  the  following 
Sunday,  i.e.  the  21st. 

The  Celtic  Churches  had  a  practice  of  their 
own,  which  they  no  doubt  inherited  from  early 
times,  and  which  had  been  used  at  Rome  a  century 
and  a  half  before.  They  have  been  unwittingly 
styled  Quartodecimans,  as  if  they  followed  the 
practice  of  the  Jews  and  of  their  imitators  at 
Ephesus. 

In  the  first  place,  their  Easter  Day  was  always 
on  a  Sunday,  like  that  of  the  Roman  Church,  while 
the  Jews  and  Quartodecimans  always  held  it  on 
the  fourteenth,  whether  that  day  was  a  Sunday  or 
not.  On  the  other  hand,  the  latter  had  no  scruples 
about  holding  their  feast  at  the  same  time  as  the 
Jews  held  their  Passover,  and  when  the  first  full 


148     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

moon  after  the   Equinox  happened  on  a  Sunday, 
they  made  that  Easter  Day. 

The  calculation  of  the  proper  time  for  keeping 
the  Easter  feast  was  complicated,  therefore,  by  two 
elements  which  were  not  present  to  the  Jews  in 
settling  their  Passover.  It  must  be  on  a  Sunday, 
and  it  must  be  after  the  fourteenth  of  the  month. 
In  addition  to  this,  it  must  conform  to  the  earlier  rite 
in  that  it  was  to  be  held  in  the  third  week  of  the 
first  month.  The  first  month  for  Paschal  purposes 
was  the  first  in  which  the  full  moon  fell  after  the 
Vernal  Equinox.  There  was  considerable  difificulty 
in  calculating  the  right  day.  This  arose  from 
accommodating  the  lunar  year  to  the  solar  year,  in 
view  of  the  periodical  vicissitudes  in  the  motion 
of  the  two  luminaries  in  question.  The  first 
point  was  to  ascertain  how  often  and  when,  a  full 
moon  recurred  on  the  same  day  of  the  month,  and 
a  series  of  cycles  was  invented  in  order  to  discover 
this.  Hippolytus  made  such  a  cycle  of  sixteen 
years,  which  became  famous  and  was  inscribed  on 
the  marble  chair  on  which  his  statue  was  placed ;  ^ 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria  adopted  a  cycle  of  eight 
years,  and  Anatolius  of  Laodicsea  one  of  nineteen. 
It  was  the  principle  of  all  three  that  Easter  must 
follow  the  Equinox.  At  Alexandria  the  Equinox  was 
dated  on  21st  March,  and  at  Rome  on  i8th  March, 
"and  it  thus  happened,"  says  Bright,  "that  between 
A.D.  325  and  343  the  Roman  Easter  fell  six  times 
on  a  different  day  from  the  Alexandrian."     In  343 

^  Bright,  87,  note  4. 


THE  CELTIC  DATING  OF  EASTER        149 

the  Sardlcan  Council  attempted  a  settlement  which 
was  not  in  effect  observed.  Two  successive 
bishops  of  Alexandria,  Theophilus  and  Cyril, 
framed  Paschal  tables  based  on  the  nineteen  years' 
cycle  ;  and  although  Rome  for  some  time  used  the 
cycle  of  eighty -four  years,^  which  had  superseded  that 
of  sixteen,  and  was  a  little  improved  by  Sulpicius 
Severus,  it  has  been  conjectured,  says  Hefele,  that 
Pope  Hilary  adopted  the  better  scheme  which  had 
been  framed  by  Victorius  of  Aquitaine,  an  abbot 
at  Rome  in  456-7.  Finally,  in  527,  one  still  more 
accurate  and  completely  in  accordance  with  Alex- 
andrian calculations  was  proposed  by  Dionysius 
Exiguus,  and  accepted  by  Rome  and  Italy.^  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Victorian  cycle  long  held  its 
ground  in  Gaul,  and  the  old  cycle  of  eighty- 
four  years  was  retained  by  the  British  and  Irish 
Churches.^ 

A  second  matter  in  which  there  was  divero-ence 
between  the  Celtic  and  Roman  usage  was  in  regard 
to  the  tonsure.  It  was  an  early  practice  in  the 
Church  for  ecclesiastics  to  cut  their  hair  short,  it 
being  deemed  more  ascetic,  and  some  ancient 
ascetics  shaved  the  head  altogether.  The  custom 
was  supposed  to  be  carrying  out  the  injunction 
in  I  Cor.  xi.  14.  The  practice  gradually  grew 
of  making  the  tonsure  of  the  hair  more  regular 
and  systematic,  and  it  took  the  form  of  carefully 
shavin^  the  back  of  the  head  and  leaving  a  circle 

o  o 

'  Bright,  88  ;  Hefele,  Councils,  i.  328. 

^  Hefele,  i.  330.  ^  Bright,  88  and  89. 


150     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

or  crown  of  hair  all  round.  This  fashion  prevailed 
in  Italy  and  Gaul.  Among  the  Celts  the  tonsure 
had  taken  another  form.  They  cut  off  the  whole 
of  the  back  hair  from  ear  to  ear,  leaving  a  semi- 
circle of  hair  on  the  front  of  the  head,  while 
the  back  of  the  head  was  bare  and  bald.  This 
practice  seems  to  have  been  as  old  as  the  time 
of  Patrick,  who  was  called  the  Tailcend  or  Shaven- 
headed.^  This  tonsure,  according  to  Dr.  Bright, 
is  represented  on  the  head  of  St.  Mummolinus  of 
Noyon,  who  had  been  a  monk  at  St.  Columban's 
monastery  of  Luxeuil.^  It  is  a  memorable  fact 
that  Gregory  of  Tours  tells  us  the  Saxons  of  the 
district  of  Bayeux  used  both  the  same  tonsure 
and  ecclesiastical  vestments  as  the  people  of 
Britanny.^ 

There  was  a  third  matter  in  which  the  Celts 
differed  from  the  Roman  usage,  doubtless  following 
a  more  primitive  custom,  namely,  in  regard  to 
baptism.  Bede  does  not  tell  us  what  the 
Celtic  peculiarity  was,  nor  can  we  do  more  than 
conjecture. 

As  is  well  known,  a  primitive  method  of  per- 
forming the  sacrament  of  baptism  was  to  employ 
a  single  immersion  only,  and  not  three,  as  was 
practised  at  Rome.  The  former  method  was  in 
vogue  in  Spain,  and  the  correspondence  of  Gregory 
with  his  friend  Leander,  the  Archbishop  of  Seville, 

^  See    Todd's   6"/,    Patrick,    411;     Stokes,     Tripartite    Life,    i. 
p.  clxxxiv. 

"^  Bright,  op.  cit.  92,  note  6 ;  Mabillon,  Ann.  Bened.  i.  529. 
'  Op.  cit.  X.  9. 


THE  CELTIC  RITUAL  IN  BAPTISM        151 

shows  that  he  allowed  the  practice  under  the  con- 
ditions prevailing  in  Spain.^  "The  early  Gallican 
books  leave  the  practice  open,  in  the  Breton 
diocese  of  St.  Malo  single  immersion  was  still  re- 
tained as  late  as  the  seventeenth  century  "  ;  ^  and  it 
was  distinctly  said  to  be  the  custom  of  the  Celtic 
Churches.  The  practice  being  so  widespread,  it 
would  seem  improbable  that  the  Roman  party 
should  have  made  it  a  cause  of  sharp  dissension 
at  Augustine's  conference. 

While  it  has,  indeed,  been  supposed  by  some 
that  the  objections  of  Augustine  were  directed  to  this 
difficulty,  others  have  thought  that  it  was  to  the  omis- 
sion of  chrism  in  baptism  by  the  Irish,  which  was 
alleged  to  be  their  practice  by  Lanfranc  in  a  letter  to 
the  Irish  King  Tirlagh.  Wilson  says  that  the  use  of 
chrism  in  baptism  is  clearly  directed  in  the  Gallican 
books  and  in  the  Stowe  Missal.  Others,  again, 
argued  that  it  was  the  absence  of  confirmation.  In 
support  of  this  view,  St.  Bernard  of  Clairvaux  is 
quoted  as  saying  that  the  Irish  at  the  time  of 
St.  Malachi's  reforms  neglected  the  rite  of  con- 
firmation.^ It  may  be  noted,  says  Wilson,  that 
the  Gallican  books  contain  no  directions  that  the 
baptized  person  should  forthwith  be  confirmed. 
"  But,"  he  says,  "the  direction  is  not  always  found, 
even  in  Roman  books ;  and  its  fulfilment  would 
depend  on  the  presence  of  the  bishop."* 

^  See  Howorth,  Life  of  Saint  Gregory  the  Great,  p.  136. 
^  Mason,  The  Mission  of  Augustus,  diss,  by  Wilson,  249. 
^  St.  Bernard,  Vita  Malachiae,  c.  3. 
*  Op.  cit.  249  and  250. 


152     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

It  has,  again,  been  surmised  that  Augustine's 
objection  was  not  in  regard  to  an  omission  but  of  an 
addition,  and  is  to  be  found  in  the  usage  of  washing 
the  feet  of  the  newly  baptized  after  the  unction  with 
chrism.  This  custom  seems  to  have  been  usual 
in  the  Gallican  rite,  and  is  recognised  in  the  Stowe 
Missal.  It  was  not  in  use  at  Rome.  In  Spain  it 
was  prohibited  by  the  Council  of  Elvira,  in  305. 
Mr.  Wilson  says  of  this  view,  which  was  supported 
by  Dr.  Rock  and  Mr.  W^arren,  that  it  is  unlikely 
that  a  custom  commonly  received  in  Gaul  would 
have  been  treated  by  Augustine  as  a  thing  intoler- 
able in  Britain.  He  himself  suggests  that  the 
invalidity  of  the  British  rite  was  perhaps  due  to 
the  fact  that  it  would  seem  not  to  have  included 
an  invocation  of  the  Trinity.  At  all  events,  in 
a  letter  of  Pope  Zacharias  to  St.  Boniface,^  it 
is  asserted  that  a  decree  had  been  made  in 
an  English  synod  (apparently  referred  by  the 
writer  to  the  time  of  Augustine)  declaring  the 
nullity  of  baptism  "without  the  invocation  of  the 
Trinity."^ 

Augustine  was  not  unreasonable  in  wishing,  if 
possible,  to  secure  uniformity  in  these  matters,  even 
if  the  British  Church  did  preserve  a  more  primitive 
usage,  which  is  probable. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  famous  conferences. 
Bede  tells  us  that,  with  the  help  {adjidorio  ustis)  of 
King  ^thelberht,   Augustine  summoned  a  confer- 

^  Jaffe,  Mon.  Maguntiajia,  p.  185. 

2  Wilson,  op.   cit.  251;    see   also    Haddan   and   Stubbs,   iii.    51 
and  52. 


THE  CONFERENCE  AT  AUST  153 

ence  of  the  bishops  and  ^  doctors  from  the  nearest 
provinces  of  the  Britons  to  a  conference.  Palgrave 
interpreted  the  words  adjiitorio  testes  as  implying 
a  good  deal.  He  says  :  "Who  called  the  prelates 
together?  did  they  not  obey  a  Saxon  king?  If 
we  give  credit  to  Bede,  we  must  admit  that 
they  were  subjected  to  Ethelbert  of  Kent,  the 
Bretwalda,  by  whose  authority  the  synod  was 
summoned."^  Mr.  Plummer  similarly  argues  that 
"  Ethelbert's  supremacy  would  seem  to  have  ex- 
tended, not  only  over  the  Saxon  kingdom,  but 
over  the  Britons  also."^ 

The  date  of  the  conference  is  discussed  by 
Haddan  and  Stubbs.  They  say  it  is  fixed  to  a 
later  year  than  601,  by  the  receipt  of  "the  respon- 
sions  "  of  Augustine  which  determined  the  latter's 
position  relatively  to  the  British  bishops.  As  they 
were  received  late  in  601,*  this  makes  it  pretty 
certain  that  it  took  place  sometime  in  602  or  603, 
a  view  concurred  in  by  Plummer.^ 

Bede  does  not  tell  us  the  names  of  the  British 
bishops  or  doctors,  nor  have  we  any  means  of 
knowing  what  they  were,  save  quite  late  unreliable 
legends.  It  has  only  been  realised  in  recent  years 
that  bishops,  such  as  we  know  them — that  is, 
diocesan  bishops — were  at  this  time  as  unknown 
among  the  Celts  as  were  parochial  clergy.  There 
were,  in  fact,  neither  dioceses  nor  parishes  at  this 
time  among  the  Britons  and  the  Irish.     The  Church 

^  In  Bede  sive  =  et.  ^  Ejig.  Com.  p.  454. 

^  Bede,  vol.  ii.  p.  73.  *  Op.  cit.  iii.  40. 

*  Bede^  vol.  ii.  p.  73. 


154     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

was  entirely  organised  on  a  monastic  plan,  and 
the  large  monasteries,  each  of  them  the  centre  of 
light  to  a  separate  community  or  tribe,  took  the 
place  of  the  modern  dioceses.  Of  these  the  abbots 
were  the  heads.  Each  large  monastery  had  a 
bishop,  but  he  was  not  the  head  of  the  community, 
but  only  the  senior  ecclesiastical  personage  whose 
presence  and  whose  help  was  necessary  for  the 
performance  of  certain  ecclesiastical  functions  ;  and 
it  is  virtually  certain  that  the  seven  bishops 
referred  to  by  Bede  were  men  of  this  stamp, 
and  in  no  sense  diocesan  bishops.  The  opposite 
view,  which  has  led  in  much  later  times  to  various 
attempts  to  locate  the  bishops  in  question  in 
certain  sees,  and  to  identify  the  latter  with  sees 
still  existing,  is  futile.  The  sources  of  these  con- 
jectures are  to  be  found  among  the  very  suspicious 
documents  known  as  the  lolo  MSS.  (143  and  548), 
which  belong  to  quite  a  late  date,  and  are  full  of 
mistakes,  guesses,  and  sophistications.  The  state- 
ments in  them  have  been  sifted  with  acumen  by 
my  friend,  Mr,  Willis  Bund,  and  I  will  abstract 
what  he  says  : — 

"The  list  in  the  lolo  MSS.  which  gives  seven 
bishops — I,  Hereford;  2,  Llandaff;  3,  Padarn ; 
4,  Bangor  ;  5,  St.  Asaph  ;  6,  Wig  ;  7,  Morganwg — is 
obviously  the  guess  of  some  Welsh  antiquary  of  much 
later  date.  That  a  bishop's  see  existed  at  Hereford 
in  601  is  opposed  to  all  historical  evidence — the 
Saxon  See  of  Hereford  having  been  carved  out 
of  Mercia,  and  not  out  of  Wales.     At  this  time 


THE  WELSH  BISHOPS  AT  THE  CONFERENCE    i  5  5 

the  so-called  Bishop  of  Llandaff  was  Dubricius, 
who  died  in  612  ;^  but  although  we  have  tolerably 
copious  lives  of  Dubricius  and  of  his  successor, 
Teilo,  there  is  no  mention  of  the  so-called  con- 
ference. At  this  time  it  is  doubtful  if  there  was 
a  Bishop  of  Padarn,  as  Cynog  the  bishop  had 
become  Bishop  of  St.  Davids.  Bangor  is  said  to 
have  been  founded  by  Deniol,  who  died  in  584;'' 
but  no  record  of  any  bishop  at  this  time  exists, 
and  it  is  probable  the  Bishop  of  Bangor  has 
been  confounded  with  the  Abbot  of  Bangor- 1 scoed. 
The  existence  of  St.  Asaph  as  a  bishopric  at 
this  date  is  most  doubtful.  It  is  true  the  alleged 
founder,  St.  Kentigern,  was  alive  ;  he  died  in  612  ; 
but  his  connection  with  it,  and  his  placing  St.  Asa 
there  on  his  return  from  Scotland,  are  monastic 
legends  of  the  twelfth  century.  It  is  also  most 
doubtful  if  any  such  see  as  Wig  ever  existed,  and 
the  same  remark  applies  to  M  organ wg."  Apart 
from  these  difficulties,  it  would  seem,  as  Mr.  Willis 
Bund  says,  that  the  first  conference  was  essentially 
a  South  Wales  gathering,  that  the  main  purpose 
of  the  second  one  was  to  consult  the  North 
Wales  men,  and  that  the  supposed  intervention  of 
bishops  from  North  Wales  at  the  first  confer- 
ence was  an  invention  of  a  later  date.  If  there 
were  seven  bishops  only  at  the  second  confer- 
ence, it  is  unlikely  that  there  were  so  many  at  the 
first  one.^ 

^  Ann.  Camb.  and  Liber  Land.  81. 

^  Ann.  Camb.  an.  cit. 

3  Willis  Bund,  The  Celtic  Church  of  Wales,  246-248. 


156     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Bede  distinctly  implies  that  the  bishops  and 
doctors  in  question  were  not  drawn  from  all 
Wales.  He  describes  them  as  having  come  from 
'' proximae  B^'ettomim  provinciae,''  suggesting  that 
they  came  from  South  Wales  only,  and  when 
the  conference  was  adjourned  it  was  in  order 
that  they  might  secure  a  more  complete  repre- 
sentation "  ttt  secundo  synodiis  phiTibus  adveni- 
entibus  fieret " ;  and  then  goes  on  to  say  that 
seven  bishops  attended  and  many  learned  men,  and 
especially  the  Abbot  of  Bangor  i^Bancornaburg), 
Dinoot.^  The  special  mention  of  this  abbot  points 
him  out  as  the  real  head  of  the  British  Church, 
and  also  points  very  much  to  the  conclusion  I 
have  mentioned,  that  the  W^elsh  Church  at  this  time 
was  based  on  a  monastic,  and  not  an  episcopal, 
organisation. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  conference,  and  first  as 
to  its  place  of  meeting.  Bede  says  it  was  near  the 
province  of  the  Britons,  in  a  place  which  "  is  still 
called  in  the  Anglian  speech  *  Augustinaes  Ac ' 
(or  Augustine's  Oak),"  and  was  on  the  frontiers  of 
the  Hwiccians  and  the  West  Saxons." 

The  shade  of  a  orreat  umbraoeous  tree  was  a 

o  o 

natural  rendezvous,  and  equally  a  protection  against 
fierce  sunlight  and  rain.  Palgrave  picturesquely 
says:  "The  oak  of  Guernica,  yet  flourishing  in 
verdant  age,  saw  the  States  of  Biscay  assemble  under 
its  branches  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  .  .  . 
and  very  many  of  the  trysting-places  of  the  English 

^  op.  cit.  ii.  ch.  2. 


THE  SITUATION  OF  "AUST"  157 

Courts  were  marked  in  like  manner  by  the  oak,  the 
beech,  or  the  elm,  the  living  monuments  of  Nature, 

surviving  through  many  a  generation  of  the  human 

"  1 
race. 

Augustine's  Oak  has  been  traditionally  identified 
with  Aust,  or  Aust  Cliff,  on  the  Severn  near  the 
Bristol  Channel,  which  seems  not  improbable. 
Aust,  say  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  derived  its  name 
from  a  ford,  Trajectus  August i.  It  is  called  ^Et 
Austm  in  a  charter  of  691-692.^  At  Aust  there  is 
a  well-known  ford,  where  Edward  the  Elder  after- 
wards had  an  interview  with  Leolinn,  Prince  of 
Wales.^ 

On  the  other  hand,  Plummer  says :  "  Mr. 
Moberley  kindly  sends  me  the  following  note  : 
'  Perhaps  the  spot  called  The  Oak  in  Down 
Ampney,  near  Cricklade.  This  would  be  on  the 
border  line  of  the  Hwiccas  and  Wessex,  about  a 
mile  north  of  the  Thames  at  the  north-east  corner 
of  the  Hwiccas,  at  the  nearest  point  to  Kent 
from  which  Augustine  came.  A  well  close  by  has 
the  reputation  of  curing  sore  eyes,  which  recalls 
Augustine's  miracle  in  which  sore  eyes  were 
cured.""' 

Bishop  Brown  argues  in  favour  of  the  same  place. 
He  says  :  "  Every  man  would  like  to  know  if  possible 
where  it  was  that  the  tall,  gaunt,  self-satisfied  man 
from  Italy  met  the  thick-set,  self-satisfied  men  from 
Wales."     Following  the   statement   of   Bede,  that 

^  Eng.  Com.  139.  ^  K.C.D.  xxxii. 

^  Stevenson,  Bede,  i.  99,  note. 
■*  PluniiTier's  Bede,  vol.  ii.  p.  74. 


158     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  conference  was  held  under  the  shade  of  the 
wide-spreading  branches  of  a  big  oak,  he  adds 
picturesquely :  "  Time  after  time  we  have  illus- 
trations of  the  fact  in  our  early  history  that  a 
great  conspicuous  tree,  not  of  any  great  height 
perhaps,  but  spreading  its  thick-leaved  branches 
far  and  wide,  was  recognised  as  a  regular  trysting- 
place."  He  interprets  Bede's  words  that  the  meeting 
took  place  on  the  border  of  the  Hwiccas  and  the 
West  Saxons,  as  meaning  that  it  took  place  some- 
where on  the  eastern  border  of  Gloucestershire, 
Worcestershire,  and  Warwickshire,  and,  drawing  a 
line  from  Swindon  in  Wessex  to  Cirencester  in 
Gloucestershire,  he  fixes  on  the  point  where  the 
line  cuts  the  county  boundary  at  Cricklade  on  the 
Thames  and  not  the  Severn  as  the  place  where 
the  conference  really  met.  I  cannot  myself  think 
it  probable  that  the  suspicious  and  jealous  British 
bishops  would  hear  of  such  a  gathering  taking 
place  in  the  midst  of  their  enemy's  country,  rather 
than  on  some  neutral  spot  on  the  frontier  of  both 
peoples ;  nor  can  I  rid  myself  of  the  very  probable 
etymology  generally  accepted  as  explaining  the 
name  Aust.  It  is,  further,  pretty  certain  that 
the  relative  position  of  the  Hwiccians  and  West 
Saxons  was  then  very  different  to  what  it  after- 
wards became. 

Wherever  the  meeting  took  place,  it  was  a 
memorable  event.  According  to  Bede,  Augustine 
began  by  trying  to  persuade  the  Welshmen  by 
friendly  admonitions  "to  hold  Catholic  peace  with 


THE  VIEW  OF  SAINT  COLUMBANUS      159 

himself  and  to  undertake  in  conjunction  with  him 
the  work  of  preaching  the  Gospel  to  the  heathen 
for  the  Lord's  sake."^ 

We  may  rest  assured  that  the  case  for  the  Celtic 
bishops  and  monks  was  stated  with  learning  and 
ingenuity,  for  they  were  at  this  time  an  accomplished 
class,  and  probably  quite  as  learned  as  the  Italian 
monks.  In  regard  to  the  difference  about  Easter, 
we  know  pretty  well  what  their  case  was,  for  it 
was  argued  by  one  of  their  number,  St.  Columban, 
in  a  letter  written  to  Pope  Gregory  himself.  In 
this  he  urged,  first,  that  when  Easter  was  put  off 
till  the  2ist  or  22  nd  of  the  month,  it  was  putting 
it  off  to  a  time  of  preponderating  darkness  (i.e. 
the  moon  had  then  entered  her  last  quarter). 
This  argument,  he  said,  had  been  urged  in  a 
canon  of  St.  Anatolius  (Bishop  of  Laodicaea  in  269), 
whose  work  had  been  approved  by  St.  Jerome.^ 
He  urged,  again,  that  the  seven  days  of  the  Lord's 
Passover,  during  which  it  could  alone  be  eaten, 
were  according  to  the  Law  to  be  numbered  from 
the  14th  of  the  moon  to  the  20th.  "  For  a  moon 
on  its  2 1st  or  22nd  day  is  out  of  the  dominion 
of  light,  as  having  risen  at  that  time  after  mid- 
night, and  when  darkness  overcomes  light."  It 
was  impious,  he  said,  thus  to  keep  the  solemnity 
of  light,  and  he  asks  the  Pope  why  he  keeps 
a  dark  Easter,  and  denounces  the  error  in  this 
matter  which  Victorias  {i.e.  Victorius  of  Aquitaine, 

^  Bede,  ii.  ch.  2. 

"  "  This  Paschal  Canon  is  now  admitted  to  have  been  a  forgery, 
and  perhaps  designed  to  support  the  Celtic  rule"  (Bright,  91). 


i6o     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

who  lived  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century) 
had  introduced  into  Gaul,  who  calculated  a  cycle 
that  was  accepted  by  Pope  Leo,  and  indeed 
until  that  of  Dionysius  Exiguus  was  introduced 
in  527. 

If  the  Pope  in  the  matter  was  content  with  the 
authority  of  his  predecessors,  and  especially  of  Pope 
Leo,  let  him  remember  that,  according  to  Eccles. 
ix.  4,  a  living  dog  is  worth  more  than  a  dead  lion, 
and  a  living  saint  {i.e.  Gregory  himself)  might 
correct  what  had  not  been  corrected  by  another 
who  came  before  him ;  and  he  bids  him  remember 
that  *'our  masters  and  the  Irish  ancients,  who  were 
philosophers  and  most  wise  computationists  in 
constructing  calculations,  held  Victorius  as  rather 
worthy  of  ridicule  and  as  not  carrying  authority." 
In  regard  to  the  argument  that  we  ought  not  to 
keep  the  Passover  with  the  Jews,  as  Pope  Victor 
had  urged,  none  of  the  Easterns  accepted  the 
view.  He  held  there  was  no  warrant  in  Scrip- 
ture for  such  a  statement,  and  the  Jews,  having  no 
Temple  outside  Jerusalem,  could  not  be  said  to  keep 
the  Passover  as  prescribed,  anywhere.  Besides, 
the  Jews  did  not  fix  the  14th  day  of  the  moon  for 
the  feast,  but  God  Himself  had  chosen  it  as  the  day 
for  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  if  God  intended 
Christians  not  to  keep  the  Passover  with  the  Jews, 
He  would  have  enjoined  on  the  latter  a  fast  of 
nine  days,  so  that  the  beginning  of  our  solemnity 
should  not  exceed  the  end  of  theirs.  By  extending 
the  fast  to  the  21st  or  22  nd,  it  was  adding,  at  the 


THE  ATTITUDE  OF  WELSH  BISHOPS      i6i 

instance  of  men,  two  days  to  the  period  fixed  by 
God  at  seven  days.^ 

What  the  details  of  the  long  dispute  referred 
to  by  Bede  as  having  taken  place  between 
Augustine  and  the  British  bishops  were  we  do  not 
know.  Neither  the  prayers  and  exhortations  nor 
the  reproaches  of  Augustine  and  his  companions 
availed  with  the  Welshmen,  and,  as  Bede  says, 
"they  preferred  their  own  traditions  to  those  of  all 
the  Churches  which  were  in  agreement  with  each 
other  in  Christ." 

We  cannot  altogether  wonder  at  the  attitude 
adopted  by  the  Celtic  monks  and  bishops  towards 
the  Roman  mission.  As  Haddan  says  :  "  Augustine 
had  no  right  to  demand  that  the  representative  of 
the  invaders,  barely  established  in  the  land,  and  still 
almost  wholly  heathens,  the  insecure  occupant  of 
a  petty  mission  should  step  at  once  into  the 
position  of  even  the  British  Archbishop  of  London 
or  York  ...  or  that  the  missionary  bishop  of  an 
invading  tribe,  whose  permanent  occupation  of  the 
island  must  have  been  far  from  a  recognised  fact 
in  the  minds  of  the  British,  and  whose  countrymen 
at  the  very  time  were  ravaging  and  destroying  the 
British  soil  on  both  sides  of  the  river  where  the 
conference  was  held,  should  claim  the  admission 
of  his  primacy  from  British  bishops.  These  were 
neither  of  them  very  self-evident  conclusions  either 
from  Church  law  or  from  common  sense.  The 
Britons  might  well  think    that   a   turn    of  fortune 

^  See  Barmby's  Letters  of  Gregory ,  vol.  ii.  p.  282,  etc. 


1 62     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

would  speedily  bring  a  British  monarch  back  to 
London  again,  .  .  .  Why  should  the  Church  sur- 
render hopes  which  the  State  still  maintained  ?  "  ^ 

It  is  at  all  events  clear  that  the  first  discussion 
at  Augustine's  Oak  was  not  very  fruitful. 

St.  Augustine  ended  it  by  offering  to  appeal 
to  God  for  a  Divine  sign  instructing  them  what 
tradition  they  should  follow,  and  by  what  path 
men  were  to  hasten  to  enter  His  Kingdom.  He 
proposed  that  some  afflicted  man  should  be 
produced,  that  each  party  should  pray  for  his 
recovery,  and  that  the  side  whose  prayer  was 
answered  was  to  be  deemed  to  be  in  the  riofht. 
His  opponents  having  consented,  though  unwill- 
ingly, a  blind  man  of  Anglian  race  (mark  that)  was 
brought  forward.  At  the  prayer  of  the  British 
priests  no  answer  was  forthcoming,  whereas,  when 
Augustine  fell  on  his  knees  and  prayed,  the  blind  man 
was  cured.  The  British  are  said  to  have  admitted 
the  cogency  of  the  test  and  its  result,  and  that 
Augustine's  teaching  was  right,  but  they  said  they 
could  not  abandon  their  ancient  practice  without 
consulting  their  people ;  and  they  asked  that  a 
second  synod  might  be  summoned,  when  a  larger 
number  might  be  present.^  We  must  always  re- 
member that  this  version  of  what  happened  comes 
from  an  avowed  enemy  of  the  Britons. 

"  The  miracle  here  reported,"  says  Dr.  Bright, 
"looks  like  an  interpolation  in  the  narrative,  and 
it  would  seem  as  if   the  delegates    to   the  second 

^  Haddan's  Remains,  315  and  316.  ^  Bede^  lib,  ji.  ch.  2. 


THE  SECOND  CONFERENCE  163 

conference,  on  both  sides,  ignored  it."^  Hook 
treats  it  as  a  Canterbury  tale. 

To  this  second  conference,  which  it  has  been 
generally  considered  was  held  at  the  same  place, 
although  we  have  no  definite  statement  on  the 
subject,  there  went,  according  to  Bede,  seven 
British  bishops  and  many  learned  men,  mainly 
from  their  most  noble  monastery  {phires  viri 
doctissimi,  inaxhne  dc  nobilissimo  eoruni  monasterio), 
which  in  the  language  of  the  Anglians  was  called 
Bancornaburg  (a  contraction  of  Bancorwarenaburg, 
i.e.  the  people  of  the  burgh  of  Bancor^),  over  which 
the  Abbot  Dinoot  is  then  said  to  have  presided. 
Dinoot,  according  to  Rhys,  is  the  Welsh  equivalent 
of  the  Latin  Donatus.^ 

Those  who  attended  this  second  conference, 
went  on  their  way  thither  to  consult  a  holy  and 
discreet  man,  who  led  the  life  of  an  anchorite,  and 
who  was  versed  in  their  traditions,  and  conferred 
with  him  as  to  whether  or  not  they  ought  to  abandon 
their  own  practice  at  the  instance  of  Augustine.  He 
told  them  that  if  Augustine  was  a  man  of  God  they 
ought  to  follow  him.  "  How  are  we  to  know.'*"  they 
said.  He  thereupon  quoted  the  passage,  "  Bear  My 
yoke  and  learn  from  Me,  who  am  humble  of  heart." 
"  If  Augustine,  therefore,  is  gentle  and  humble,  make 
sure  he  carries  Christ's  yoke  ;  but  if  he  is  proud,  it 
shows  he  is  not  from  God,  and  we  must  disregard 
him."     "How  are  we  to   test  this.-*"    asked  they. 

^  See  Bright,  94.  ^  Plummer,  Bede^  vol.  ii.  p.  75. 

*  Celtic  Britain,  310. 


1 64     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

"  Let  the  Prior  of  the  Abbey  and  his  followers 
approach  him.  If  he  rises  from  his  seat  and  goes 
to  meet  you,  then  is  he  a  humble  man.  If  not, 
but  treats  you  all  contemptuously,  then  is  he  a 
proud  one  ;  and  as  you  are  the  more  numerous,  you 
in  turn  can  show  your  contempt."  They  followed 
his  counsel.     Augustine  remained  seated. 

The  story,  as  told  by  Bede,  reads  naively,  and 
is  probably  founded  on  a  good  tradition.  At  all 
events,  the  effect  was  that  the  Britons  were  angry 
[mox  in  irani  conversi  sunt),  and  noticing  his  pride 
began  to  contradict  everything  he  said.^  As  Dr. 
Bright  says  :  "  Even  according  to  Bede's  own  show- 
ing they  clearly  did  not  deem  themselves  bound 
to  accept  the  exhortations  of  a  bishop  sent  from 
Rome,  and  thus  far  a  representative  of  Rome,  as 
suck.  They  treated  the  question  as  open — Shall 
we  adopt  his  ways  or  shall  we  not  ? "  ^ 

Augustine  now  addressed  them,  and  apparently 
surrendering  minor  points  like  the  tonsure,  in  which 
the  Britons  differed  from  the  Universal  Church 
{immo  tiniversalis  ecclesiae  contraria  ge7'itis),  he  said 
he  would  be  content  if  they  would  concede  three  : 
I.  The  time  of  the  Paschal  feast ;  2.  in  regard  to 
baptism,  that  they  would  conform  to  the  practice 
of  the  Roman  and  Apostolic  Church  {juxta  morem 
sanctae  Romanae  et  apostolicae  ecclesiae  conpleatis) ; 
and  3.  that  they  would  join  with  them  in  preach- 
ing the  word  to  the  heathen  Anglians.  To  these 
they  would   not   consent,    nor   would   they   accept 

^  Bede^  ii.  2,  -  Op.  cit.  95. 


FRUITLESS  END  OF  THE  CONFERENCES      165 

Augustine  for  an  archbishop,  arguing  that  if  he  re- 
ceived them  sitting  he  would  hold  them  in  further 
contempt  if  they  began  to  obey  him.  It  must  be 
said  that,  apart  from  his  haughty  attitude,  reason 
and  good  sense  seem  to  have  been  largely  on  the 
side  of  the  Roman  missionary  in  the  matter,  and 
that  his  opponents  showed  as  litde  conciliation  in 
their  attitude  as  he  did.  On  receiving  their  unyield- 
ing reply,  Augustine  adopted  a  minatory  attitude. 
"  If  you  are  unwilling  to  accept  peace  with  brethren, 
you  will  have  to  accept  war  from  enemies ;  and  if 
you  will  not  preach  the  way  of  life  to  the  nation 
of  the  Anglians,  from  their  hands  you  will  suffer 
the  punishment  of  death."  This  statement,  doubt- 
less made  by  Augustine  in  a  moment  of  haste, 
has  been  interpreted  as  a  deliberate  prophecy 
which  brought  about  its  own  fulfilment,  and  has 
involved  him  in  a  good  deal  of  obloquy.  It  has 
been  suggested  by  many  polemical  writers  that  he 
actually  inspired  the  massacre  of  the  Bangor 
monks,  which  happened  some  years  later,  and  this 
seems  to  have  been  the  theory  in  Wales,  for 
Geoffrey  of  Monmouth  says  that  ^thelfrid,  King 
of  Northumbria,  who  slaughtered  the  monks,  was 
incited  to  do  so  by  y^thelberht  {Edelbertus  Edel- 
friduvi  instwiulavi{).  ^ 

Bishop  Browne  reports  a  Welsh  tradition  that 
Cadvan  (who  was  a  king  in  Wales  at  this  time), 
when  he  was  told  that  the  Romans  had  customs 
which  differed  from  those  of  the  Britons,  but  held 

^  Geoffrey  of  Monmouth,  viii.  4. 


1 66     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  same  faith,  remarked  that  if  the  Cymry  believed 
all  that  the  Romans  believed,  it  was  as  strong  a 
reason  for  Rome  obeying  them  as  for  them  obey- 
ing Rome. 

In  regard  to  the  responsibility  of  Augustine  for 
the  massacre  at  Bangor,  nothing  is  plainer  than  that 
y^thelfrid's  savage  campaign  against  the  Britons 
was  inspired  by  the  fact  that  they  had  given  shelter 
to  his  rival,  King  yEdwin,  who  was  probably  housed 
and  cherished  by  the  monks  of  Bangor,  and  not 
directly  by  any  prophecy  of  Augustine.  He  was  a 
ruthless  heathen,  and  not  very  likely  to  be  affected 
in  his  opinion  by  Christian  priests.  It  nevertheless 
remains  the  fact  that  Bede  expresses  no  shame  or 
remorse  either  in  regard  to  the  ill-timed  prophecy 
or  to  its  cruel  fulfilment,  and  seems  to  exult  in 
it  as  an  exercise  of  Divine  judgment  [Quod  ita 
per  omnia,  tit  praedixerat,  divino  agente  judicio 
patratum  est)}  It  will  be  noted  that  here,  as 
a  few  lines  further  on,  where  Bede  speaks  of 
Augustine's  praesagiiun,  he  treats  what  the  latter 
said  as  a  prophecy. 

Mr.  Haddan  contrasts  the  results  of  Augustine's 
proud  bearing  and  tactlessness  with  those  of  the 
cordial  conduct  of  St.  Eligius  towards  Columban, 
which  eventually  led  to  the  ending  of  the  con- 
troversy as  it  existed  on  the  other  side  of  the 
Channel,  in  the  gradual  absorption  of  obnoxious  or 
singular  customs  there.  "A  plate,"  he  says,  "in 
Mabillon   gives    us    both    the    Latin    and   Celtic 

^  Op.  cit.  ii.  ch,  ii. 


EXPLANATION  OF  THE  WELSH  ATTITUDE     167 

tonsures,  as  worn  respectively  in  the  seventh 
century  by  two  loving  coadjutors  in  the  missionary 
work  of  the  north-east  of  France  at  that  time."  ^ 

Dr.  Hunt  has  some  shrewd  comments  on  these 
transactions.  "  While,"  he  says,  "  Bede's  story  of 
the  consultation  with  the  hermit  represents  a  gen- 
uine tradition,  Augustine's  lack  of  courtesy  would 
scarcely  have  had  much  weight  with  the  Britons 
had  they  not  already  determined  on  the  course 
which  they  adopted.  Their  rejection  of  Augustine 
certainly  involved  a  renunciation  of  the  authority 
of  the  Roman  See,  but  that  result  was  merely 
incidental ;  nothing  so  far  as  we  know  was  said 
about  it,  and  the  past  history  of  the  British  Church, 
specially  in  connection  wiih  the  date  of  Easter, 
shows  no  reason  for  believing  that  obedience  to 
Rome  would,  in  itself,  have  been  distasteful  to  them. 
They  were  strongly  attached  to  their  traditions. 
.  .  .  It  was  race  hatred  that  kept  the  Britons 
from  preaching  the  Gospel  to  the  English,  and  ex- 
aggerated their  feelings  with  regard  to  ecclesiastical 
usages  which  were  in  their  eyes  hallowed  by  a 
sentiment  of  nationality,  specially  keen  and  sensit- 
ive among  a  depressed  and  conquered  people. 
It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  they  rejected 
Augustine  at  least  as  much  because  he  came  to 
them  as  Archbishop  of  the  English,  as  because  he 
demanded  that  they  should  conform  to  the  Roman 
usages  in  the  computation  of  Easter  and  in  the  ritual 
of  baptism."^ 

1  Op.  cit.  314.  2  Hunt,  op,  cit.  37. 


1 68     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

In  regard  to  their  objection  to  sharing  in  the 
evangelisation  of  the  AngHans,  it  is  at  all  events 
singular,  as  has  been  remarked,  that  while  the 
Scots  {i.e.  Irish)  vfQVQ par  excellence  the  missionaries 
of  nearly  all  Europe  north  of  the  Alps,  and  in 
particular  of  all  Saxon  England  north  of  the 
Thames,  hardly  a  Cumbrian,  British,  Cornish,  or 
Armorican  missionary  to  any  non-Celtic  nation 
is  mentioned  anywhere.^  As  regards  the  Britons 
the  last  sentence  is  an  exaggeration.  As  Plummer 
says,  Nynian  is  a  notable  exception,  and  there  are 
others.^  So  much  for  Augustine's  negotiations 
with  the  British  clergy.  That  wonderful  dealer 
in  fables,  Gocelin,  tells  us  that  on  his  return  home 
Augustine  passed  through  Dorsetshire,  where 
the  peasants  threw  fishes'  tails  at  him  and  his 
companions,  and  were  punished  by  having  tails 
attached  to  themselves  and  their  descendants 
ever  after.^ 

These  events  doubtless  took  place  after  the  return 
of  Augustine's  embassy  to  the  Pope  already  named. 
Bede  tells  us  that  in  the  year  604,  Augustine,  whom 
he  here  styles  "  Archbishop  of  Britain,"  ordained  two 
bishops.  At  this  ordination  he  acted  alone.  The 
Pope  had  in  his  instructions  to  him  given  his 
countenance  to  this  otherwise  irregular  proceeding 
on  the  ground  of  its  being  a  case  of  necessity, 
there  being  no  assistant  bishops  available.  The 
regulation  was,  in  fact,  of  no  moment  in  regard  to 

^  See  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  i.  154. 

2  Bede,  vol.  ii.  p.  76  ;  see  also  Rhys,  Celtic  Britain,  172  and  173. 

'  Hardy's  Catalogue,  i.  193. 


FOUNDATION  OF  ST.  PAUL'S,  LONDON      169 

the  validity  of  the  ordination,  and  had  only  been 
introduced  to  prevent  scandals  and  favouritism, 
etc.,  by  securing  the  adhesion  of  the  other  prelates 
of  the  province.  The  Pope,  who  in  such  a  matter 
was  a  bishop  and  nothing  more,  and  who  doubtless 
followed  the  primitive  practice,  has  always  ordained 
other  bishops  without  assistants. 

The  two  bishops  thus  ordained  were  Mellitus 
and  Justus,  both  of  them  among  the  new  recruits. 
Mellitus  is  referred  to  in  more  than  one  of  Gregory's 
letters,  where  he  is  called  "the  abbot,"  by  which 
he  apparently  means  the  Abbot  of  St.  Andrew's  on 
the  Caelian  Hill.  In  one  of  these  letters,^  in  which 
he  couples  him  with  Laurence  the  priest,  Gregory 
calls  him  ''  dilectissimus  et  communis  jilius" 

Mellitus  was  appointed  missionary  bishop  to 
the  East  Saxons,  who,  says  Bede,  "were  separated 
from  Kent  by  the  Thames  and  were  contiguous 
to  the  Eastern  Sea."  They  apparently  extended 
westwards  to  the  Chilterns,  and  their  territory 
thus  included  a  portion  at  least  of  modern  Hert- 
fordshire. 

Their  capital  (metropolis)  was  the  city  of  London 
(Lundenwic  as  it  is  called  in  the  A.-S.  Chronicle). 
The  fact  of  London  being  their  capital  shows  that 
the  kingdom  of  the  East  Saxons  also  included 
Middlesex.  It  was  situated  on  the  north  bank  of 
the  Thames,  and  was  the  emporium  of  many  peoples 
coming  by  sea  and  land.^  Saberct  (?  Sigeberht),  the 
son  of  ^thelberht's  sister  Ricula,  was  then  their  king. 

^  E.  and  H.  xi.  41.  2  Bede^  ii.  3. 


I70     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

He  was  subject  to  the  overlordship  of  ^thelberht 
{^quamvis  sub  potestate  positus  ejusdein  Aedilbercti). 
"As  soon,"  says  Bede,  "as  that  province  received 
the  word  of  truth  by  the  preaching  of  MelHtus, 
y^dilberht  built  the  church  of  St.  Paul  the  Apostle, 
where  he  and  his  successors  might  have  their 
Episcopal  See."  It  will  be  noted  as  a  proof  of 
his  authority  that  it  was  yEthelberht  and  not 
Saberct  who  founded  the  church  in  London,  which 
was  certainly  in  the  latter's  kingdom. 

What  the  original  church  of  St.  Paul's  was  like, 
we  have  no  means  of  any  kind  of  knowing ;  not 
a  trace  of  it  exists,  nor  have  we  any  account  of  it. 
The  church  is  said,  in  a  legendary  story,  to  have 
been  founded  on  a  site  once  occupied  by  a  Roman 
camp,  and  where  a  temple  of  Diana  had  stood.^ 
Camden  refers  to  a  structure  called  "  Diana's 
Chambers,"  and  to  "the  ox  heads  digged  up 
there."  An  altar  of  Diana  was  in  fact  discovered 
near  the  spot  not  many  years  ago. 

It  is  curious  that  this  church  should  be  always 
referred  to  from  its  patron  saint,  while  the  other 
great  churches  are  named  from  the  towns  where 
they  are  situated,  as  York,  Canterbury,  and 
Rochester. 

It  became  the  largest  church  in  England,  as 
St.  Paul's  outside  the  Walls  was  the  largest  in 
Rome  till  the  later  St.   Peter's  was  built. 

The  church  was  built,  according  to  tradition, 
about  609,  and  was  dedicated  to  St.  Paul ;  being  the 

^  See  Dugdale,  ist  ed.,  St.  PauPs,  28  ;  and  Milman,  Annals,  5. 


FOUNDATION  OF  ROCHESTER  CATHEDRAL    1 7 1 

first  church  dedicated  in  England  either  to  him  or 
St.  Peter.  According  to  the  Statutes  of  St.  Paul's, 
ii.  52,  the  festum  Sancti  Adelberti  was  a  festival 
of  the  first  class  at  St.  Paul's.^  It  was  afterwards 
believed  that  Saberct  founded  the  Monastery  of  St. 
Peter's,  in  Thorney  Island,  in  "the  great  marsh" 
then  formed  by  the  Thames  as  it  bent  south- 
westward,  and  which  became  known  as  the  West 
Minster.  Thorn  ascribes  its  foundation  to  a  citizen 
of  London  at  the  suggestion  of  yEthelberht,^  but 
the  story  rests  on  no  sound  basis.  Bright  says  the 
traditional  tomb  of  Saberct  is  to  the  south  of  the 
altar  in  the  present  church  at  Westminster.^ 

While  Mellltus  was  ordained  as  bishop  of  the 
East  Saxons,  Justus  was  similarly  ordained  Bishop 
of  Dorubrevis,  or  Rochester,  He  had  possibly  been 
a  monk  of  St.  Andrew's.* 

"The  fortress  of  the  Kent  men  {CasteUum  Ca7t- 
tuarioruvt)"  says  Bede,^  "  was  called  Hrofaescaestir, 
from  one  named  Hrof,  who  was  formerly  its  chief 
man  [a  primario  quonda^n  illius,  qtti  dicebatitr 
Hrof),  and  was  situated  twenty-four  miles  to  the 
west  of  Durovernum."  A  place  with  a  similar 
name,  Hrofesbreta,  also  situated  on  the  Medway,  is 
mentioned  in  a  charter.^  Harpsfeld  says  that  in  his 
time  there  was  still  a  family  in  Kent  called  Hrof. 

^  Bright,  op.  cit.  loo,  note  3.  ^  X.  Scriptores,  1768. 

^  Op.  cit.  100  and  loi,  notes. 

*  It  may  be  mentioned,  however,  that  a  presbyter  called  Justus 
signed  the  acts  of  a  Roman  Synod  of  the  5th  July  595  as  priest  of 
the  Church  of  St.  Nereus  and  Achilleus  {E.  and  H.  v.  57<a;),  and  that, 
on  5th  October  600,  Gratiosus  was  priest  of  that  church  {ib.  xi.  15). 

*  Op.  cit.  ii.  3.  6  K.C.D.  iii.  386  ;  Birch,  i.  364. 


172     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Bede  gives  its  Latin  name  as  Dorubrevis.  It  is 
apparently  named  in  the  Peutingerian  Table  as 
Roiti,  being  then  doubtless  a  military  station  pro- 
tecting the  Medway.  William  of  Malmesbury  ^ 
describes  Rofa,  as  he  calls  it,  as  a  town  planted 
on  a  very  narrow  site  [situ  nimium  angushmi\ 
but  on  a  height  [in  edito  locatum)  washed  by  a  most 
boisterous  river,  and  inaccessible  to  an  enemy 
except  with  great  danger,  and  yet,  as  Plummer 
says,  it  was  sacked  by  Ethelred  of  Mercia  in  676.' 

It  was  doubtless  the  second  in  importance  of 
y^thelberht's  towns,  and  commanded  the  Medway. 
It  was  there  that  Augustine  fixed  a  new  see,  to 
which  he  appointed  Justus.  The  church  was  dedi- 
cated to  St.  Andrew,  doubtless  in  remembrance  of 
the  mother  church  of  so  many  of  the  missionaries, 
on  the  Caelian   Hill. 

It  has  been  argued,  but  I  think  gratuitously,  that 
the  two  bishops  in  Kent  point  to  there  having  once 
been  two  kingdoms  of  Kent.  Of  this  I  know  no 
real  evidence.  It  was,  in  fact,  the  fashion  of  the 
times,  especially  in  Gaul,  to  place  a  bishop  in  every 
considerable  town. 

The  foundations  of  the  eastern  part  of  the  church 
built  by  y^thelberht  at  Rochester  have  been  recently 
recovered  in  excavations  made  there  by  Mr.  Livett, 
and  described  by  him  and  Mr.  Hope  in  vols.  xvii. 
and  xxiii.  of  the  Archceologia  Cantiana.  The  walls 
that  remain  are  not  higher  than  20  inches.  They 
are  formed  of   irregular   masonry,   with  sandstone 

1  Gest.  Pont.  i.  33.  2  Vol.  ii.  p.  80. 


The  Black  Lines  represent 
THE  Ground  Plan  of  the 
Saxon  Church  of  St. 
Martin  at  Canterbury. 


Ground  Plan  of  St.  Pancras's 
Church  at  Canterbury. 


Ground  Plan  of  the  Saxon 
Cathedral  at  Rochester. 


Ground  Plan  of  the  Saxon 
Church  at  Lyminge. 


To  face  J>.  172. 


ST.  ANDREW'S  CATHEDRAL,  ROCHESTER      173 

quoins  and  wide  mortar  joints,  the  mortar  being 
hard,  made  of  sand  with  a  few  shells  and  a  litde 
charcoal,  with  traces  of  herring-bone  work.  The 
thickness  of  the  walls  is  2  feet  4  inches,  with 
a  foundation  course  of  tufa  and  ragstone  on 
concrete  full  of  small  pebbles,  and  blocks  of  rag- 
stone.  The  apse,  like  that  of  St.  Pancras,  was 
semi-elliptical  in  oudine,  and  was,  like  that  in 
St.  Martin's,  direcdy  in  contact  with  the  east  of 
the  nave,  and  separated  from  it  in  all  probability 
by  a  triple  arcade,  as  in  the  former  of  the  two 
churches  just  mentioned.  The  western  part  of 
the  nave  is  now  covered  by  the  west  front  of 
Rochester  Cathedral,  and  could  not  be  explored. 
The  nave  measured  42  feet  by  28  feet  6  inches. 

We  are  nowhere  told  how  Augustine  constituted 
the  cathedral  administrative  staff  of  the  two  sees 
of  London  and  Rochester,  any  more  than  we  are 
in  regard  to  his  own  cathedral  at  Christ  Church, 
Canterbury,  but  it  is  pretty  certain  that  it  was 
formed  on  a  monastic  basis. 

One  of  Augustine's  alleged  proteges,  whom  he 
is  reported  to  have  baptized,  was  Saint  Livinus, 
known  as  the  Apostle  of  Brabant,  who  was 
murdered   12th  November,  a.d.   656.^ 

Auo-ustine  was  now  nearing  the  term  of  his 
life.  His  last  recorded  act  was  a  most  uncanonical 
one.  He  had  ordained  two  bishops,  either  of  whom 
might  well  expect  to  succeed  him  as  Metropolitan. 
For  some  reason  or  other  he  had  other  views,  and 

1  Hardy,  Catalogue,  \,  255, 


174     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

was  determined  that  his  successor  should  be  one 
whom  he  had  not  yet  raised  to  the  episcopate, 
namely,  one  of  the  companions  whom  he  had 
originally  brought  with  him,  and  who  is  referred 
to  in  Gregory's  letters  as  Laurence  the  priest. 
Whether  he  was  a  monk  as  well,  we  do  not  know. 
A  Laurence  who  was  a  "deacon  of  the  Holy 
See  "  [qui  prmius  fuerat  in  or  dine  diaconii  sedis 
apostolicae),  and  was  superseded  by  Honoratus  in 
September  591,  is  mentioned  in  one  of  Gregory's 
letters.^  Another,  or  perhaps  the  same  Laurence, 
is  called  a  most  illustrious  man  {vir  clarissimus\  and 
acted  as  a  papal  messenger.^  When  the  first 
missionaries  set  out  with  Augustine  they  took  with 
them  as  priest,  Laurence,  whom  we  are  now  con- 
sidering, and  it  was  he  who  was  sent  to  Rome 
to  report  Augustine's  success  to  the  Pope  and  to 
bring  back  recruits  for  the  mission.  In  Gregory's 
letters  he  is  named  before  Mellitus. 

It  was  this  Laurence  whom  Augustine  had 
selected  as  his  successor.  He  was,  however,  ap- 
parently afraid  that  his  wish  might  not  be  carried 
out,  and  so,  in  spite  of  the  Canon  Law,  he  deter- 
mined to  ordain  him  to  his  own  see  and  as  his 
successor  during  his  own  lifetime,  "fearing,"  in 
the  words  of  Bede,  "lest  the  Church  should  be 
left  without  a  chief  pastor  amidst  difficult  and 
rude  surroundings."  This  did  not  show  much  con- 
fidence in  his  two  fellow-bishops.  Bede,  who,  no 
doubt,  knew  well  that  the  proceeding  was  irregular, 

^  E.  and  H.  ii.  i,  ^  Jbid.  ix.  63  and  130. 


BISHOPS  AND  THEIR  SUCCESSORS         175 

quotes  as  a  precedent  the  case  of  St.  Peter  himself, 
who,  he  says,  similarly  consecrated  St.  Clement,^  a 
statement  which  is  most  doubtful.^  A  better  pre- 
cedent would  have  been  that  of  St.  Athanasius, 
who  consecrated  his  friend  and  successor,  Peter, 
five  days  before  his  own  death. ^  A  Roman  synod 
in  465  forbade  bishops  to  nominate  their  suc- 
cessors [ne  successores  s2tos  designent\^  The  law 
of  the  Church  was,  also,  plain  on  the  subject. 
Although  it  was  quite  regular  for  a  bishop  to 
have  assistant  bishops  {chorepiscopi,  as  they  were 
called),  the  ancient  canons,  and  notably  canon  8 
of  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  seemed  to  forbid  the 
consecration  of  a  bishop  as  coadjutor  and  future 
successor  by  the  actual  occupant  of  a  see.  A 
similar  prohibition  was  embodied  in  a  canon  of 
the  Council  of  Antioch  in  341. 

Gregory  of  Tours  mentions  how  Felix,  Bishop 
of  Nantes,  who  was  grievously  ill,  summoned  the 
neighbouring  bishops,  and  implored  them  to  confirm 
the  appointment  of  his  nephew,  whom  he  had  selected 
as  his  successor,  which  they  did.  The  young  man 
was  still  a  layman,  and  went  to  Gregory  to  ask 
him  first  to  oive  him  the  tonsure  and  then  to  <yo 
on  with  him  to  Nantes  and  there  consecrate  him 
as  bishop  in  the  place  of  himself.  Gregory  replied 
that  it  was  contrary  to  the  Canons  for  any  one 
to  be  appointed    bishop   unless   he  had    regularly 

^  Bede,  ii.  4. 

^  See  Plummer,  ib.  vol.  ii.  82,  who  discusses  the  question. 
^  See  Ch?'on.  Acephalum,  quoted  by  Bright,  106,  note  3. 
*  Dudden,  ii.  145,  note. 


176     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

passed  through  the  several  ecclesiastical  grades. 
He  bade  him  return  whither  he  had  come,  and  ask 
those  who  had  elected  him  to  have  him  tonsured, 
and  after  he  had  worked  assiduously  as  a  priest 
for  some  time  he  might  then  hope  to  become  a 
bishop.  Meanwhile,  his  uncle  Felix  recovered,  and 
the  matter  was  postponed,  and  eventually  his  relative 
Nonnichius  became  bishop.^  In  the  next  century, 
the  request  of  St.  Boniface  to  be  allowed  to  con- 
secrate his  own  successor  in  his  own  lifetime  was 
refused  by  Pope  Zacharias  as  being  against  all 
ecclesiastical  rules  and  the  institutes  of  the  Fathers.^ 
The  consecration  of  Laurence  as  his  successor  by 
St.  Augustine  had  at  least  one  notable  effect  which 
has  been  overlooked.  It  was  clearly  the  intention 
of  the  Pope  that  the  arrangement  made  when 
Augustine  came  to  England,  by  which  Canterbury 
was  made  the  seat  of  the  Metropolitan  of  the  realm, 
was  only  meant  to  be  temporary,  and  that  Gregory 
had  in  view  the  restoration  of  London,  which 
was  the  most  important  city  in  the  kingdom,  and 
had  once  in  all  probability  been  the  seat  of  the 
Metropolitan,  to  its  old  position.  The  raising  of 
Laurence,  who  was  only  a  priest,  to  be  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  while  the  See  of  London  was  still 
held  by  Mellitus,  instead  of  promoting  the  latter, 
confirmed  the  original  arrangement  and  clearly 
made  it  very  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  make 
the  change  later  on.     In  a  letter  afterwards  written 

^  Gregory  of  Tours,  vi.  15. 

?  Mon.  Mog.  p.  119  ;  Dudden,  ii.  145,  note  3. 


DEATH  OF  ST.  AUGUSTINE  177 

by  Kenulf,  King  of  Mercia,  to  Pope  Leo  the 
Third,  he  states  that  Gregory's  intention  to  make 
London  the  Metropolitan  city  was  frustrated  by 
the  fact  of  Augustine's  burial  at  Canterbury,  where- 
upon it  seemed  good  to  the  Witan  {cunctis  gentis 
nosti'-ae sapient ibus)  that  "the  Metropolitan  Honour" 
should  remain  there/  This  seems  a  far-fetched 
reason,  for  which  a  more  cogent  cause  was  the 
one  just  named. 

The  date  of  Augustine's  death  is  not  certainly 
known.  On  his  tomb  it  was  recorded,  accordino-  to 
Bede,^  that  he  died  on  the  7th  of  the  kalends  of  June, 
i.e.  26th  May.  He  does  not,  however,  mention  the 
year.  This  date  is  also  given  in  the  Martyrology,^ 
and  is  there  stated  in  this  fashion,  ''  Depositio 
S.  Aiigiistini  primi  Anglo7'2un  episcopiy  In  the 
A.-S.  Chronicle  the  date  is  only  given  in  the  late 
MS.  F.,  which  puts  it,  as  Mr.  Plummer  says,  at 
the  impossible  year  614.  This  may  be  a  mistake 
for  604,  but  Thorn  says  that  some  placed  it  in 
613.^  Florence  of  Worcester  and  the  Chronicon 
S.  Crtccis  put  it  in  604.  Thorn  and  Thomas  of 
Elmham  both  give  it  in  605.  Haddan  and  Stubbs 
accept  604  as  the  date,  while  Dr.  Bright  made  it 
605.  It  is  probable  that  604  was  the  year,  the 
same  year  which  saw  the  death  of  Pope  Gregory. 

Augustine's  name  is  still  to  be  found  in  the 
Calendar  of  the  English  Church. 

At   the   Council    of  Clovesho   in   747,^    it    was 

*  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  522.  ^  Op.  cit.  ii.  3. 

'  Bede  Opera,  iv.  72.  *  Plummer,  voj.  ii.  p.  81 

*  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  368. 

12 


178     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

decreed  that  the  26th  May,  the  obit  of  St.  Augus- 
tine,  "who  first  brought  the  faith  to  the  AngHan 
people,"  should  be  always  invoked  in  the   litanies 
(in  Laetaniae  Cantatioiie)  after  that  of  St.  Gregory, 
and  his  feast  be  observed  as  a  holiday  (fcriatus). 
Their  names,  we  are  told,  had  long  been  honoured 
together  in  a  Mass  read  every  Saturday  at  an  altar 
in  the    monastic  Church    of  SS.  Peter   and    Paul. 
It  was  on  Augustine's   Mass-day  in  946  that  Saint 
Edmund  was  said  to  have  been  murdered.     In  the 
fourteenth  century  devotion  to  our  Saint  seems  to 
have  waned,  and  in  1356  Innocent  the  Sixth  renewed 
the   celebration    of    his    festival    as    a    holiday   of 
obligation,  making  it  a  double.     A  duplex  or  double 
meant  that  when  the  festival  of  a  saint  coincided 
with   a   great   festival    of  the   Church,  his   special 
service  in  the  Missal  was  always  used  instead  of 
that  otherwise  appointed  for  the  day  in  the  Calendar  ; 
and  lasdy,  by  a  brief  dated   28th   July    1882,   the 
Pope  ordered  St.  Augustine's  day  to  be  celebrated 
by  the  whole  Church.^ 

Bede  tells  us  that  on  his  death  Aug^ustine's 
body  was  buried  outside  and  near  the  Church 
of  the  blessed  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  which 
was  still  incomplete  and  unconsecrated.  As  soon, 
however,  as  it  was  consecrated  it  was  taken  inside 
and  decently  reburied  in  the  northern  porticus 
or  chapel  —  where  the  bodies    of  the  subsequent 

1  In  the  margins  of  some  MSS.  of  Bede  are  inserted  certain 
lections  specially  selected  to  be  read  on  St.  Augustine's  day  in  the 
Refectory,  and  taken  from  Bede's  life  of  him  (see  Plummer's  Bede^ 
i.  pp.  425-427)- 


ST.   AUGUSTINFS  EPITAPH  179 

archbishops  have  been  interred  except  two,  namely, 
Theodore  and  Brightwald,  who  were  laid  in  the 
church  itself,  because  the  p07'ticus  would  hold  no 
more.  In  this  chapel  was  an  altar  dedicated  to 
the  blessed  Pope  Gregory,  "where  every  Saturday 
memorial  Masses  were  solemnly  celebrated  by  a 
priest  of  the  place." 

Bede  reports  Augustine's  epitaph  in  the  follow- 
ing words  :  "  Hie  7^equiescit  domimis  Augustinus 
Doruvernensis  archiepiscopus  primus,  qui  olim  hue 
a  beato  Gregorio  Romanae  ttrbis  pontifice  direetus, 
et  a  Deo  operatione  7?tiraeti/ortwi  suff?iltus,  Aedel- 
berctznn  regent  ae  gentein  illius  ab  idolorttni  cziltu 
ad  Christi  fideni  perduxit,  et  co7npletis  in  pace 
diebus  officii  stci,  defunctus  est  vii.  Kalendas  Junias, 
eodein  rege  regnante  "  ;  ^  which  is  thus  neatly  trans- 
lated by  Mr.  Mason :  "  Here  rests  the  Lord 
Augustine,  first  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who 
being  sent  hither  by  the  blessed  Gregory,  Bishop 
of  the  City  of  Rome,  and  supported  by  God  with 
the  working  of  miracles,  brought  King  ^thel- 
berht  and  his  people  from  the  worship  of  idols  to 
the  faith  of  Christ,  and,  having  fulfilled  in  peace 
the  days  of  his  ministry,  died  26th  May  in  the 
reign  of  the  same  King." 

The  account  given  by  Gocelin  of  the  subsequent 
translation  and  the  miracles  of  St.  Augustine  is 
more     than    usually   interesting.^       He    describes 

^  Bede,  ii.  3. 

2  The  narrative  seems  to  be  transposed  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum, 
and  part  ii.  ought  apparently  to  be  part  i.  At  all  events,  the  story 
really  begins  with  the  first  chapter  of  part  ii.  {Act.  Sand.,  26th  May). 


i8o     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

how  the  church  of  the  Abbey  of  St.  Peter  and 
St.  Paul,  whose  foundations  were  laid  by  Augustine, 
was  largely  rebuilt  in  his  own  time,  and  says  that 
preparations  for  the  reconstruction  were  first  made 
by  Abbot  Ailmer,  who  became  Bishop  of  Shireburn 
in  I022.  He  solemnly  took  away  the  arches  and 
columns  {arms  et  coliwmas)  of  the  shrine,  which  had 
been  built  over  the  bodies  of  the  saints  "with  Roman 
elegance."  ^  With  these  he  decorated  the  cloister  of 
the  monastery.  This  looks  rather  more  like  the 
spoliation  of  the  monument  than  a  rebuilding  of 
it.  He  was  succeeded  by  Abbot  iElstan,  who 
transferred  the  remains  of  St.  Mildred  to  St. 
Augustine's.  He  visited  Rome,  where  the  Em- 
peror Henry  happened  to  be,  who  received  him 
very  honourably,  and  begged,  but  begged  in  vain, 
that  he  would  send  him,  what  he  deemed  very 
precious,  the  slightest  fragment,  even  a  hair  or  a 
pinch  of  dust  {exh'evntm  pulvisczthwi)  of  the 
Archbishop  ;  but  he  declared  that  he  dared  not 
dispose  of  anything  of  the  kind.^  He  was  in  turn 
succeeded,  in  1047,  as  abbot  by  Wulfric,  who 
was  skilled  in  secular  and  ecclesiastical  learning. 
His  great  ambition  was  to  rebuild  the  church 
of  the  monastery,  but  he  dared  not,  without 
much  higher  authority,  touch  a  monument  so 
venerable  and  so  crowded  with  saints.  Pope  Leo 
the  Ninth  happened  to  be  then  at  Rheims  for  the 
dedication  of  the  church  there,  and  Wulfric  was 
sent    to   greet    him    by    King    Edward    the    Con- 

^  Act.  Sand.,  26th  May,  vol.  vi.  p.  428.  -  lb.  p.  429. 


REBUILDING  OF  ST.  AUGUSTINE'S        i8i 

fessor.  From  him  he  obtained  permission  to 
rebuild  the  church.  Thereupon  he  proceeded  to 
demolish  it  {a  fronte  diruit).  He  transferred  the 
tomb  of  St.  Mildred,  which  was  erected  before 
the  principal  altar  of  the  Apostles,  into  the  Chapel 
of  Saint  Augustine,  and  then  pulled  down  the 
western  part  of  the  Chapel  [oratorii)  of  the  Virgin 
(which  had  been  built  by  King  Eadbald),^  with 
its  appurtenant  side  chapels  [cum  porticibus),  while 
he  purged  the  cemetery  of  the  brethren,  which 
was  between  the  two  churches,  all  which  space 
he  added  to  the  area  of  the  new  church.  Of  this 
he  built  the  walls,  the  columns,  and  the  arches. 
This  interference  with  her  chapel,  we  are  told, 
aroused  the  indignation  of  the  Virgin,  and  she 
struck  the  unfortunate  abbot  with  an  illness  from 
which  he  died  shortly  after.  The  date  is  un- 
certain, but  the  Bollandists  put  it  in   1060.^ 

Wulfric  was  succeeded  as  abbot  by  Egelsin. 
He  was  apparently  displaced  at  the  Conquest  by 
Scollandus  or  Scotlandus  (whose  tomb  was  dis- 
covered by  Mr.  St.  John  Hope  in  recent  ex- 
cavations). He  was  anxious  to  continue  the 
work  of  reconstruction,  but  feared  the  fate  of  his 
predecessor  unless  he  had  a  due  sanction.  This 
was  given  him  by  Pope  Alexander,  and  included 
permission  entirely  to  pull  down  the  old  building 
and  to  remove  the  various  bodies  of  the  saints 
lying  there. 

He  thereupon   demolished   those  parts    of  the 

^  Vide  infra,  p.  234.  -  Gocelin,  loc.  cit. 


1 82     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Chapel  of  the  Virgin  which  Wulfric  had  left 
standing,  and  also  cleared  away  the  new  buildings 
which  had  been  erected  by  the  latter,  and  which 
were  doubtless  thought  to  be  not  fine  enough — 
a  good  proof  of  the  larger  views  on  such  matters 
which  came  in  with  the  Conquest. 

He  then  removed  to  a  temporary  resting-place 
the  very  notable  and  large  series  of  the  remains 
of  kings  (including  those  of  ^thelberht),  arch- 
bishops, and  saints  who  had  been  buried  there, 
and  which  are  enumerated  by  Gocelin,  with  details 
about  each.  When  describing  the  removal  of 
St.  Letardus  (i.e.  Liudhard),  he  mentions  a 
number  of  miracles  which  were  connected  with 
his  relics,  none  of  which  present  any  features  of 
permanent  interest. 

This  closes  the  second  part  of  Gocelin's 
narrative,  and  in  order  to  pursue  the  story  we 
have  to  turn  to  the  first  part.  He  there  tells  us 
how  the  new  presbytery  with  its  chapels  occupied 
a  much  larger  space  than  the  old,  including  the 
site  of  the  Chapel  of  the  Virgin  already  named. 
This  part  of  the  building  having  been  more  or  less 
completed,  Abbot  Scotlandus  died,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Abbot  Wido,  who  proceeded  to  pull 
down  the  west  end  of  the  older  church,  including 
the  nave,  where  the  tomb  of  St.  Augustine  lay. 
Before  doing  so,  he  asked  the  consent  of  King 
William,  who  gave  it,  on  condition  that  the  trans- 
port of  the  precious  remains  was  done  with  due 
solemnity    and    with    a    suitable    attendance    of 


REBUILDING  OF  ST.   AUGUSTINE'S       183 

bishops  and  abbots.  The  King  said  he  would 
have  been  present  himself,  but  for  the  fact  that 
he  was  about  to  set  out  for  the  Scottish  War. 
The  governor  or  master  mason  {ino7iasteri- 
archd),  impatient  at  the  slowness  with  which  the 
work  of  demolition  and  the  removal  of  the 
saints  was  proceeding,  brought  a  powerful  ram, 
and  overthrew  that  part  of  the  structure  where 
some  of  the  saints  lay.  "There  was  no  excuse 
for  his  carelessness,"  says  Gocelin,  "  except  his 
good  intention."  Before  the  crash  he  rescued  the 
sweet-smelling  relics  of  St.  Hadrian  the  Confes- 
sor and  St.  Mildred  the  Virgin  of  Christ  which 
lay  there.  Meanwhile  a  great  mass  of  stones, 
beams,  portions  of  the  roof  and  of  the  leading  {tarn 
moles  lapidum^  trabium  tectorimique,  phmibatorum) 
fell  down  and  covered  several  of  the  monuments, 
including  that  of  St.  Augustine,  but  did  not, 
apparently,  do  them  much  injury.  When  the 
mass  of  debris  was  taken  away,  the  saints'  bodies 
which  were  there  were  removed.  There  still  re- 
mained the  south  wall,  where  St.  Augustine  and 
Archbishop  Deusdedit  lay.  This  also  was  battered, 
and  at  length  it  broke  in  a  huge  solid  piece,  and, 
as  it  were,  leaped  over  the  resting-place  of 
St.  Augustine  and  fell  towards  the  south,^  which 
was,  as  usual,  deemed  a  miracle.  The  violent 
disruption  of  the  old  building  apparently  laid  bare 
the  tombs  of  several  saints,  and  as  there  was  a 
danger  of   their   being    exposed   to   the    elements 

^  Gocelin,  op.  cit.  409  and  410. 


I  84     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  workmen  built  a  shed  {tugttrmm)  of  boards 
[assic2ilis),  and  one  or  two  of  the  brethren  kept 
vigil  there  for  nine  weeks.  Gocelin  reports  how 
during  the  temporary  absence  of  these  watchers 
a  candle  which  had  been  placed  on  the  tomb 
of  St.  Augustine  fell ;  fortunately,  and  of  course 
miraculously,  its  rich  coverings  [linteis  azit 
pallets),  were  not  injured.  The  tombs  were  made 
of  fragile  material  and  of  bricks  [fractiles  et 
lateriliae)  (these  last  doubtless  from  some  Roman 
building),  and,  what  was  deemed  miraculous,  the 
angels  and  the  figure  of  the  Saviour  represented 
in  glory  between  them,  which  stood  on  Augustine's 
tomb,  were  found  unbroken  and  intact. 

The  time  had  now  arrived  when  it  was  necessary 
to  remove  St.  Augustine's  remains.  We  are  told 
that  there  was  present  the  famous  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  Gundulf.  He  marched  with  the  abbot 
and  the  brethren,  singing  hymns,  and  ordered 
them  to  open  the  tomb,  but  every  one  was 
afraid  to  begin.  The  bishop,  armed,  we  are  told, 
with  prayer  and  devotion,  determined  to  set  them 
an  example,  and  struck  the  first  blow  (ictum  in 
tumbos  fronta  dedit).  Thereupon  a  certain  Plither, 
described  as  dictator  of  the  church  {?  master 
workman),  proceeded  to  pull  down  the  altar  of 
Augustine,  and  when  he  had  razed  it  to  the 
ground  there  was  disclosed  a  slab  of  white 
Parian  marble.  It  had  doubtless  been  originally 
taken  from  some  Roman  building.  This  he 
raised    slightly,    when    there    came    from    beneath 


DISCOVERY  OF  REMAINS  185 

a  scented  vapour  {erninpens  vapor  nardifltms).  He 
then  gently  let  it  down  ag-ain,  as  it  was  not  his  duty 
to  disturb  the  contents  of  the  tomb  thus  discovered. 
By  order  of  the  abbots  the  monks  removed  the 
stone,  when  a  rush  of  sweet  scent  seemed  to  come 
from  the  lips  and  breast  of  the  Saint. 

They  then  produced  some  candles  and  went 
in,  and,  "  behold,  the  first  founder  {institutor primi- 
cej'ius)  of  Christianity  in  Britain  was  disclosed," 
after  he  had  lain  there  five  hundred  years  and  sur- 
vived many  rough  times.  The  remains  lay  draped 
in  chasuble,  alb,  and  stole,  with  Augustine's  staff 
[baculus),  sandals,  and  other  pontifical  garniture 
(ceterisqite  Pontificalibus  instrumentis).  The  monks 
now  collected  the  remains  and  placed  them  in  a 
chest  vested  with  rich  cloth  (linteala  et  palliata),  and 
ornamented  with  gold  and  precious  stones.  Among 
the  dust  even  bits  of  the  flesh  were  found  intact. 
"They  then  moved  the  body,  which  shed  a  sweet 
odour  over  the  whole  city  and  even  over  the 
whole  of  Kent " — a  statement  which  must  be 
accepted  allegorically,  and  it  was  placed  before  the 
altar  of  the  Apostles  until  a  suitable  final  resting- 
place  could  be  found  for  it.  A  few  days  later  they 
proceeded  with  the  building  of  the  nave,  and  the 
first  of  the  Qfreat  columns  on  the  north  side  was 
placed  on  the  spot  where  St.  Augustine's  body 
formerly  lay.  Gocelin  tells  us  the  ground  in  which 
the  bodies  had  been  deposited  was  covered  with  red 
tiles  {lateres  ptmicei)  with  a  polished  texture,  and 
was  reeking  with  saffron-coloured  nard  oil  (crocea 


1 86     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

ftardo  firmantes).  These  were  taken  up  and  laid 
down  at  the  ahar  of  St.  Gregory  in  the  new 
church.^  Many  tried  to  secure  some  reHcs  of 
the  Saint  for  their  churches,  but  they  got  not 
a  single  hair,  but  some  fragments  of  the  tiles  and 
some  of  the  earth  in  which  the  body  lay  were 
secured  by  the  churches  at  Bortinga  (?)  and 
Ramsey.  Gocelin  was  an  eye-witness  of  what  he 
here  relates. 

We  have  now  to  turn  to  Thorn,  who,  although 
he  lived  a  long  time  after,  had,  as  we  shall  see,  a 
contemporary  document  as  a  witness  of  what  he 
states.  According  to  him,  Abbot  Wido,  who 
succeeded  in  1087,  separated  the  remains  into  two 
portions.  The  greater  part  of  them  he  placed  in  a 
stone  coffin  or  tomb,  and  to  prevent  them  being 
molested  he  built  it  secretly  into  the  north  wall  of  the 
church,  only  a  few  monks  knowing  its  whereabouts. 
In  order,  however,  that  the  faithful  might  have  some 
of  the  Saint's  remains  to  cherish  and  revere,  he 
placed  a  few  small  bones  {qtubusdam  assiculis)  of 
the  Saint  and  a  portion  of  his  ashes  in  a  coffer 
{vasctdiivi)  of  lead,  and  enclosed  them  in  a  stone 
tomb  i^lapidnm  feretruni)  or  shrine.  On  the  top  of 
this  tomb,  in  a  small  leaden  case  enclosed  in  a  silver 
shrine,  were  placed  some  fragments  of  the  Saint's 
flesh  and  some  of  the  earth  moistened  with  his 
blood. 

In  1 168,  the  Church  of  St.  Augustine  was  burnt, 
when  the  above-named  shrine  was  injured. 

^  Op.  cit.  416,  etc. 


lAiio  Dfii  MCC.VL  iliml  .iltaft-  <lcilici.t  iii  lioiiore  jAplo.ePetet  Pinli  rt  fe.  A7re™^«"i    vKn]  N; 
[Alio  UiTi  Mi.VCXX-\'  iltii,l  alUi-f  dclical  iii  l..-<noic  A)ioU  i\-t;,-t  I'duU  i?ri    AtiriiftTiii  Aiylor.Ai-ii  .■ 


Flll.i'h;-!-!.    1{'.-.'.        I.!   Ma.li.  a.  VrUc    Kfc 


rha. 


The  Old  Altar  of  St.  Augustine's  at  Canterbury,  with  the 

Shrinks  of  /Ethelberht,  King  of  Kent,  and  of  the  early 

Archbishops  grouped  around  it. 

To/ace  J>.  i8 


DISCOVERY  OF  REMAINS  187 

On  the  27th  of  April  1221,  the  monks  de- 
termined to  discover  where  their  predecessor  had 
secretly  buried  the  Saint.  They  had  a  hole  broken 
into  the  north  wall  close  to  the  altar  of  St. 
Augustine,  and  there  found  his  stone  monument, 
beautifully  decorated  with  iron  and  lead  (^ferro  et 
pliujibo  peroptime  sigillata),  and  inscribed — 

"  Inclitus  Anglorum  Praesul  pius  et  decus  altum 
Hie  Augustinus  requiescit  corpora  Sanctus." 

The  Abbot,  Hugh,  was  at  the  time  absent  in 
France.  On  his  return  the  tomb  was  opened  in 
the  presence  of  many  other  abbots  and  magnates, 
when  inside  it,  besides  the  Saint's  remains,  there  was 
also  found  a  leaden  tablet  inscribed  with  an  account 
of  what  Wido  had  done  with  the  remains  as  above 
described.  We  further  read  that  close  beside  St. 
Augustine's  remains  when  replaced  there  were  also 
put  some  relics  in  the  silver  shrine,  including  hair 
of  the  Virgin  Mary,  a  piece  of  the  seamless  coat 
of  the  Saviour,  of  the  column  at  which  He  was 
flagellated,  etc.  etc. 

Abbot  Hugh  enriched  the  shrine  with  gold,  silver, 
and  precious  stones,  "as  now  seen,"  adds  Thorn. 

It  is  interesting  to  read  that  in  1526,  at  the  very 
verge  of  the  Reformation,  and  before  Augustine's 
monastery  and  tomb  were  destroyed,  Henry,  Car- 
dinal of  York  (i.e.  Wolsey),  presented  King  John 
the  Third  of  Portugal  with  some  relics  of  St. 
Augustine,  namely,  the  chin  bone,  three  teeth,  and 
the  OS  notabilis,  in  exchange  for  some  remains  of 
other   saints.     We   are   further  told   that  in    1628 


1 88     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

these  relics  were  taken  by  the  Portuguese  Bishop 
Luzane  to  Belgium,  and  placed  in  a  silver  shrine 
in  the  Church  of  St.  Salvator  at  Antwerp,  belong- 
ing to  the  Cistercians/ 

Gocelin  enumerates  a  great  many  miracles  which 
were  reputed  to  have  been  the  handiwork  of 
Augustine's  intervention  or  of  his  remains.  Most 
of  them  are  of  the  usual  very  homely  kind,  but 
some  are  interesting  for  the  local  colour  they  afford, 
and  may  be  appropriately  reported  here.  He  tells 
us  that,  inter  alia,  in  the  reign  of  William  the  First 
some  English  merchants  sent  fifteen  ships  (which 
are  described  as  having  one  mast  and  one  sail)  to 
Caen  to  bring  stone  for  the  building  of  the  King's 
palace  at  Westminster.  The  person  employed  in 
the  business  (apparently  the  owner  of  the  ships), 
called  Vitalis,  a  friend  of  Abbot  Scotland,  was  per- 
suaded to  present  a  shipload  of  the  stones  for  the 
building  of  the  new  church  of  the  abbey.  A  great 
storm  having  come  on,  fourteen  of  the  ships 
foundered,  with  their  crews  and  their  burdens. 
The  only  one  which  escaped  was  the  one  destined 
for  the  Abbey  of  St.  Augustine.  The  stones  were 
used  for  bases,  columns,  capitals,  and  architraves 
(epistylia).  This  ship,  after  great  dangers,  and, 
as  Gocelin  says,  by  the  solicitude  of  the  Saint, 
reached  a  safe  anchorage  at  Brembre  {i,e,  Bramber, 
in  Sussex). 

In  another  narrative,  we  have  a  miracle  reported 
about  a  senior  monk  of  the  Abbey  of  St.  Augustine 

1  Act.  Sanct.^  lib.  cit.  pp.  897  and  898, 


MIRACLES  189 

who  was  sent  to  "  the  town  of  Mark  [ad  Marchiam 
villavi),  near  Boulogne  in  Flandres,"  which  we  are 
told  was  rich  in  stone  {in  lapides  foecunda).  With 
him  were  sent  a  number  of  workmen,  who  secured 
a  large  quantity  of  stone  for  the  monastery. 

In  another  story  we  read  of  three  men  from 
Kent,  whose  names  Gocelin  gives,  who  were  metal 
workers,  or  what  we  should  call  tinkers,  and  were 
in  the  habit  of  travelling  about  the  country  buying 
from  gold  and  silversmiths,  moneyers,  and  other 
metal  workers  {inetallorum  fusores)  the  scoriae, 
ashes,  scourings,  and  other  waste  products  of  their 
craft,  which  they  melted  together  into  large  lumps, 
and  then  pounded  and  washed,  and  thus  recovered 
the  remains  of  the  precious  metals  they  contained. 
Happening  to  be  at  Bath  (which  Gocelin  describes 
as  being  "all  built  of  stone,  it  being  so  abundant 
there "),  and  requiring  a  big  stone  to  do  this 
pounding,  they  removed  one  from  the  King's  high- 
way, for  which  they  were  prosecuted.  Two  of 
them,  who  were  old,  were  allowed  to  pay  a  ransom 
of  twenty  solidi  of  silver,  but  the  younger  one, 
who  was  strong,  was  tortured.  They  bound  his 
legs  in  the  stocks,  and  put  irons  on  his  legs  and 
arms.  When,  however,  he  made  an  appeal  to 
St.  Augustine,  his  own  Kentish  Saint,  his  bonds 
fell  off  and  he  was  released. 

In  another  story  we  read  of  certain  English 
nobles  who  at  the  Norman  Conquest  went  to 
Constantinople,  where  one  of  them  secured  the 
command   of  an    army.      He    married  and  built  a 


I90     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

church  dedicated  to  St.  Augustine  and  St.  Nicholas, 
which  was  frequented  by  the  EngHsh  exiles. 

Again,  Egelwi,  Abbot  of  Athelney  (Ethelinge), 
having  gone  to  Rome,  was  prevented  returning  for 
six  weeks  by  violent  storms,  and,  having  eaten  up 
his  food  and  spent  his  money  and  sold  his  horses 
and  clothes,  was  reduced  to  great  want.  He  there- 
upon made  a  vow  to  St.  Augustine  that  if  he  ever 
again  viewed  with  safety  the  tower  of  his  church  at 
home,  he  would  build  one  in  his  own  monastery  in 
honour  of  the  Saint,  which  he  eventually  did. 

It  will  now  be  well  to  try  and  measure  some- 
what the  work  actually  done  by  Augustine.  It  has 
been  both  exalted  and  minimised  by  writers  writing 
with  a  polemical  purpose,  and  who  have  not  tried 
to  weigh  his  opportunities  and  his  difficulties. 
When  he  died  he  had  succeeded,  by  the  help  of 
Queen  Bertha,  in  converting  the  King  of  Kent 
and  overlord  of  the  greater  part  of  Britain  to  the 
Christian  faith.  He  had  also  secured  a  considerable 
number  of  people  of  note  who  could  be  influenced  by 
the  King,  and  perhaps  of  others  who  began  to  have 
longings  for  a  closer  tie  with  the  communities  of 
Western  Europe.  This  could  only  be  secured  by 
joining  the  common  faith,  which  made  them  in  a 
sense  one  commonwealth. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  cannot  doubt  that  a  large 
number  of  y^thelberht's  own  people  clung  to  their 
own  faith  and  to  the  o"ods  which  their  fathers  had 
worshipped.  Some  of  them  would  do  so  furtively, 
and  some   of   them   would    move   away    to    more 


RESULTS  OF  ST.   AUGUSTINE'S  LABOURS      191 

congenial  lands  like  that  south  of  the  Weald, 
especially  to  Sussex,  which  remained  pagan  for  a 
considerable  time  later.  What  recruits  were  secured 
for  the  faith  were  much  too  quickly  converted  to 
realise  fully  what  they  were  about,  and  retained 
no  doubt  a  large  portion  of  their  old  supersti- 
tions, and  especially  their  belief  in  magic,  which 
under  another  name  was  shared  by  the  Church. 
The  missionaries  made  it  easy  to  conform  to  the 
change,  by  adopting  old  festivals  and  retaining  old 
rites  and  customs,  but  the  Christianity  of  the  new 
converts  was  largely  nominal.  The  God's  name  was 
changed  and  certain  forms  of  ritual  were  introduced, 
but  otherwise  the  essentials  were  for  a  long  time 
after  this  much  the  same  as  before. 

In  addition  to  this,  Augustine  had  consecrated 
two  bishops  to  two  sees  other  than  his  own,  and  had 
appointed  his  own  successor.  The  bishop  of  one  of 
these  sees  (namely  Rochester)  was  largely  a  suffragan 
of  his  own.  The  other  was  planted  in  London,  the 
great  emporium  of  English  trade,  a  place  where,  as 
after  events  showed,  Christianity  made  very  little 
way  for  some  time,  and  the  bishop  of  which,  Mellitus, 
although  nominally  bishop  of  the  country  north  of 
the  Thames  and  east  of  the  Chilterns,  called  Essex, 
had  probably  little  influence  outside  the  Court  circle 
of  King  Saberct  (Sigeberht),  ^Ethelberht's  nephew 
and  protegd. 

Besides  these  human  foundations  of  his  Church, 
Augustine  had  built  or  partly  built  five  churches,  all 
of  which  lived  on,  and  four  of  them  have  continued 


192     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

to  exist  on  the  same  spots  where  he  founded  them, 
certainly  with  numerous  alterations  and  rebuildings, 
but  with  a  continuous  life  for  thirteen  hundred  years. 
He  or  one  of  his  immediate  successors  doubtless 
founded  the  first  English  school  in  his  realms,  as 
well  as  the  singing  school  at  Canterbury,  which  both 
became  famous  in  later  days. 

The  Rev.  H.  A.  Wilson  has  discussed  with 
learning  and  ingenuity  the  liturgical  questions 
which  arise  out  of  the  mission  of  Augustine. 
At  this  time  there  was  a  considerable  difference 
between  the  Roman  rite  and  that  of  Gaul.  As 
he  says,  the  most  marked  difference  was  that  "  the 
Roman  canon  of  the  Mass,  with  the  exception  of  a 
few  minor  clauses,  which  vary  on  certain  days,  was 
fixed  and  unchanging.  In  the  Galilean  rite,  on  the 
other  hand,  only  a  few  sections  of  the  corresponding 
portion  of  the  Mass  were  fixed  :  the  prayers  which 
were  grouped  about  these  fixed  portions,  and  with 
them  made  up  the  whole  of  the  consecration  prayer, 
varied  from  day  to  day."^  Augustine  had  received 
the  Pope's  permission  to  make  such  selections  from 
the  different  rites  as  he  should  think  most  appro- 
priate to  the  local  circumstances.  We  can  hardly 
doubt  that  he  would  be  tempted  to  continue  as  far 
as  he  could  the  traditions  of  the  little  Church 
introduced  by  Liudhard  and  his  companions, 
which  were  practised  in  the  Queen's  Chapel,  and 
were  doubtless  entirely  Galilean,  since  any  material 
change  would  cause  suspicion  among  those  already 

^  Mason's  Mission  of  Augustine,  Appendix  IV,  p.  242,  note. 


RITUAL  INTRODUCED  BY  ST.  AUGUSTINE    193 

converted.  "These  doubts  would  not  be  lessened 
if,  as  seems  likely,  the  Franks  who  had  come  with 
the  missionaries  to  England  as  interpreters  were 
accustomed  to  the  Gallican  rite.  St.  Aueustine 
would  have  to  face  the  question  whether  it  was 
desirable  to  allow  a  diversity  which  might 
lead  to  division  and  disunion  within  the  royal 
household,  and  among  the  growing  body  of  English 
Christians."^  It  is  most  likely  that  the  basis  of  his 
service  books  was  that  of  the  Roman  usage  which 
Augustine  had  been  accustomed  to  at  St.  Andrew's. 
We  read  in  the  13th  Canon  of  the  Council  of 
Clovesho  that  the  English  Church  had  adopted  the 
model  of  the  Roman  Canon  of  the  Mass  which  it  had 
received  from  the  Roman  Church,  and  probably  with 
Gregory's  not  very  important  alterations.  In  the 
principal  functions,  such  as  the  observance  of  the 
hours  of  prayer,  in  the  order  of  the  Mass,  in  the 
ceremonial  with  which  Augustine  administered  the 
rite  of  baptism  to  his  first  converts,  he  would 
naturally  follow  the  usage  of  his  own  time.  That 
the  Roman  style  of  Church  music  was  maintained  at 
Canterbury  appears  from  Bede,^  where  it  is  recorded 
of  James  the  Deacon  that  he  "instructed  many 
persons  in  chanting"  (juxta  morem  Romanorum 
sive  Cantuariorum).^  On  the  other  hand,  it  is 
plain  that  in  some  things  Augustine  adopted  the 
Gallican  rite  :  thus  in  the  use  of  certain  litanies  on 
the  three  days   before  Ascension  Day  known    as 

^  Mason's  Mission  of  Augustine ,  Appendix  IV.  pp.  241  and  242. 
'  Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  20.  3  /^.  238. 

13 


194     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Rogation  Days.  These  were  not  known  at  Rome 
until  the  time  of  Leo  the  Third  (795-816),  Mean- 
while they  had  long  been  known  in  Gaul.  They  are 
said  to  have  had  their  beginning  at  Vienne  about 
the  year  470,  and  their  general  adoption  was  ordered 
by  the  Council  of  Orleans  in  511,  while  in  567 
a  Council  at  Lyons  provided  that  similar  litanies 
should  also  be  used  in  the  week  preceding  the 
first  Sunday  in  November.  It  is  very  probable 
that  Augustine  and  his  companions  had  heard  and 
taken  part  in  them  during  their  long  delay  in  Gaul, 
and  had  adopted  them  in  part  or  whole.  The 
anthem  which  Bede  tells  us  the  monks  sang  as 
they  marched  to  Canterbury,  occurs  in  one  of  the 
Roofation  Litanies  in  use  long-  after  at  Vienne  and 
probably  in  other  churches  in  France,  and  it  may 
well  be  that  the  Gallican  custom  of  Rogation 
processions  which  were  established  in  England  as 
an  ancient  usage  at  a  time  when  it  was  still  un- 
recognised at  Rome  was  first  brought  into  England 
by  the  Roman  mission.^  The  Council  of  Clovesho 
in  747  orders  the  observance  of  the  Rogation  pro- 
cessions according  to  the  method  of  "  our  prede- 
cessors "  {secundiun  morem  priorum  7zostrorum)} 

It  would  seem  further,  as  Bishop  Brown  says, 
that  in  the  early  days  of  its  history  the  Church  of 
the  Anglians  had  a  certain  number  of  rites  which 
it  probably  derived  from  the  British  Church. 
Whether  they  were  adopted  by  Augustine  or  at  some 

^  Wilson,  op.  cit.  236  and  237. 

2  See  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  Councils^  etc.,  iii.  368. 


THE  RESULTS  OB'  ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION    195 

later  time  we  do  not  quite  know.  Among  these  he 
enumerates  a  rite  which  Gildas  says  was  peculiar  to 
the  British  Church,  namely,  that  of  anointing  the 
hands  at  ordination.  The  lessons,  too,  used  at  ordi- 
nation were  different  both  from  the  Galilean  and  from 
the  Roman  use.  In  the  early  Anglo-Saxon  Church 
this  anointing  the  hands  of  deacons,  priests,  and 
bishops  was  retained ;  hence  it  seems  probable 
that  other  rites  at  ordination  in  the  early  Anglo- 
Saxon  Church,  which  we  cannot  trace  to  any  other 
source,  were  British.  Such  were  the  prayer  at 
giving  the  stole  to  deacons,  the  delivering  of  the 
Gospel  to  deacons,  and  the  investing  of  the  priests 
with  the  stole.^ 

Leaving  these  matters  of  routine  and  of  simple 
accommodation  which  Augustine  probably  faced 
with  prudence  and  discretion,  and  turning  to  things 
of  greater  moment  which  were  better  tests  of  his 
real  capacity  and  power,  we  meet  at  once  with  the 
infirmities  attending  the  lack  of  experience  of  men 
and  things  due  to  his  conventual  training,  his  want 
of  mental  grasp,  and  smallness  of  vision.  This  was 
notably  the  case  in  his  treatment  of  the  British 
Church  and  in  some  of  his  questions  to  Gregory 
on  matters  of  difficulty. 

In  regard  to  these  matters  I  may  quote  a 
measured  judgment  of  him  by  an  English  scholar 
of  considerable  perspicuity.  "  If  any  man,"  says  the 
late  Haddan,  "  ever  had  greatness  thrust  upon  him 
with  which,   Malvolio-like,  he  did  not  quite  know 

^  The  Church  in  these  Islands  before  Augustine^  149  and  150. 


196     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

how  to  deal,  that  man  was  Augustine  of  Canterbury. 
The  Pope  and  his  missionary  remind  us  of  nothing 
more  forcibly  than  of  some  Arnold  or  Moberly, 
trying,  by  mingled  rebukes,  advice,  and  warnings, 
to  get  a  timid,  awkward  boy  to  act  his  part  pro- 
perly in  the  semi-independent  sphere  of  prefect  or 
monitor.  Scarcely  able  to  tear  himself  from  the 
side  of  the  truly  great  man  on  whom  he  leaned, 
shrinking  back  from  exaggerated  difficulties  the 
moment  he  found  himself  alone,  delaying  on  the 
threshold  of  his  enterprise  an  unreasonable  time  ; 
strangely  ignorant,  at  the  end  of  this  delay,  of  the 
true  position  of  the  Celtic  Churches  already  in 
the  land  to  which  he  was  sent,  and  still  needing 
interpreters  to  enable  him  to  preach  to  his  future 
flock ;  asking,  with  solemnity,  the  simplest  of 
questions,  such  as  a  novice  might  have  settled 
without  troubling  the  Pope,  a  thousand  miles  off, 
about  the  matter  ;  catching  too  readily  at  immediate 
and  worldly  aids  to  success,  and  when  success  came 
unduly  elated ;  ignoring  altogether  the  pioneers 
whom  he  found  at  work  before  him,  and  sensitively 
proud  and  unconciliatory  towards  supposed  rivals 
— Augustine  has  one  claim  to  our  respect,  that  of 
a  blameless  and  self-denying  Christian  life."^ 

It  is  certainly  a  notable  thing,  and  measures  his 
reputation  among  his  contemporaries,  that  nothing 
remains  of  what  he  wrote  save  the  questions  he  sent 
to  Gregory,  which  so  well  define  the  real  stature  of  the 
man.     Not  a  letter  or  a  homily  or  any  other  docu- 

^  Remains t  303. 


THE  RESULTS  OF  ST.  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION   197 

ment  from  his  hand  was  preserved  either  at  Rome 
or  Canterbury.  The  Pope's  replies  to  his  letters 
were  kept  in  both  places,  but  of  the  first 
Bishop  of  the  English  race  we  have  nothing. 
What  a  contrast  to  another  Missionary  Bishop 
who  learnt  his  work  in  England  and  went  a  few 
years  later  to  evangelise  Germany — Boniface  ! 

The  best  that  can  be  said  of  Augustine  is  that 
he  was  a  commonplace  man,  with  good  motives  and 
high  standards,  set  to  do  a  work  much  beyond  his 
capacity,  and  for  which  he  had  had  a  very  in- 
different training.  The  Church  he  planted  was  a 
plant  with  a  feeble  constitution  from  the  first,  and 
it  needed  a  more  vigorous  personage,  who  was 
also  a  greater  scholar  and  a  bigger  man,  to  set 
it  going  again  on  a  more  promising  journey.  He 
presently  came,  and  his  name  was  Theodore. 


CHAPTER    IV 
THE  END  OF  ST  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Saint  Laurence 

As  we  have  seen,  St.  Gregory  and  St.  Augustine 
probably  died  in  the  same  year.  Before  we  com- 
plete the  picture  of  Augustine's  mission,  it  will  be 
well  to  survey  the  political  events  elsewhere  during 
the  next  few  years,  and  also  the  lives  and  characters 
of  Gregory's  immediate  successors.  We  have  seen 
how  the  half-savage,  cruel,  dissipated,  and  incapable 
Phocas  obtained  the  throne  of  the  Eastern  Empire. 
His  reign  brought  gloom  to  the  great  city  on 
the  Bosphorus,  and  disgrace  and  disaster  to  the 
Empire.  Continually  pursued  by  secret  fears  of 
plots  and  assassination,  and  of  the  resuscitation  of 
the  family  of  Maurice,  he  laid  a  heavy  hand  on  all 
he  suspected  of  favouring  it.  He  especially  pursued 
the  widow  and  daughters  of  his  predecessor.  In 
Gibbon's  sonorous  phrases,  "  A  matron  who  com- 
manded the  respect  and  pity  of  mankind,  the 
daughter,  wife,  and  mother  of  Emperors,  was 
tortured  like  the  vilest  malefactor,  to  force  a 
confession  of  her  designs  and  associates ;  and  the 


THE  STATE  OF  THE  EMPIRE  199 

Empress  Constantina,  with  her  three  innocent 
daughters,  was  beheaded  at  Chalcedon  on  the  same 
ground  which  had  been  stained  with  the  blood  of 
her  husband  and  her  five  sons."^  Meanwhile, 
every  kind  of  ingenious  torture  and  cruelty  was 
applied  to  endless  victims  elsewhere,  and,  again 
quoting  Gibbon,  "the  Hippodrome  was  polluted 
with  heads  and  limbs  and  mangled  bodies."  Phocas 
made  the  wives  of  the  great  citizens  the  victims  of 
his  lust.  He  displaced  the  really  able  commanders 
in  the  army  whom  he  suspected  of  similar  treasons 
to  that  he  himself  had  dealt  out  to  Maurice.  He 
replaced  them  by  relatives  and  flatterers.  Among 
his  victims  was  the  finest  soldier  of  the  time,  who 
was  alone  fitted  to  cope  with  the  powerful  Persians, 
Narses,  who,  having  been  deprived  of  his  command 
and  resented  it  by  rebellion,  was  burnt  to  death  at 
Constantinople. 

While  this  was  the  condition  of  things  at  home, 
the  affairs  of  the  Empire,  especially  in  the  far  East, 
again  became  greatly  troubled.  The  Persian  ruler 
Chosroes  professed  to  be  horrified  at  the  murder 
of  Maurice  and  his  family.  Phocas,  according  to 
Theophylactus,^  had  sent  him  as  trophies  the  heads 
of  the  murdered  Emperor  and  his  sons.  Chosroes 
invaded  the  Empire.  In  order  to  increase  the  armies 
in  the  further  East  an  expensive  peace  was  pur- 
chased from  the  Avars,  but  the  Roman  generals 
Germanus  and  Leontius  were  both  badly  defeated. 
The  Persians,  incited  by  their  Magi,  captured  the 
^  Op.  cit,  ed.  Bury,  v.  65.  *  Lib.  viii,  ch.  15. 


200    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

fortresses  of  Mardin,  Daras,  Amida,  and   Edessa, 
and    carried    off    vast   plunder    and    innumerable 
prisoners    to    Persia.      "In    608    the   danger    was 
brought    nearer    to    the    careless    inhabitants    of 
the    capital ;    for,    having   occupied    Armenia   and 
Cappadocia,   Paphlagonia   and    Galatia,    the   army 
of  the  fire  worshippers  advanced  to  the  Bosphorus, 
showing  mercy  in    the    march   to  neither  age  nor 
sex,    and    encamped    at    Chalcedon,    opposite    to 
Constantinople,  and  thus,"  says  the  historian,  "  there 
was  tyranny  both  inside  and  outside  the  city.  .   .   . 
In  Syria  there  was  always  a  spirit  of  disaffection 
towards    the    orthodox  Byzantine  government,  for 
Syria  was  full  of  Jews  as   well   as  of  heretics  of 
various  kinds.  .  .  .   Phocas  conceived  the  ill-timed 
idea  of  constraining  all  the  Jews  to  become  Chris- 
tians.    The  consequence  was  a  great  revolt  of  the 
Hebrews  in  Antioch  ;    Christians  were  massacred, 
and  a  cruel  and  indecent  punishment  was  inflicted 
on  the   Patriarch  Anastasius.     Bonosus,   Count  of 
the  East,  now  cast  out  all  the  Jews  in  the  city."^ 

In  Egypt  and  the  Province  of  Africa,  the 
granaries  of  the  Empire,  riots  and  outbreaks  took 
place,  and  for  two  years  Heraclius,  the  Exarch 
of  the  latter  province,  "  refused  all  tribute  and 
obedience  to  the  Centurion  who  disgraced  the 
throne  of  Constantinople."^  Meanwhile  these  dis- 
turbances interfered  with  the  grain  supplies  at  the 
capital,  where  a  famine  ensued. 

^  Bury,  Hist.  Later  Roman  Empire.^  ii.  199  and  200. 
-  Gibbon,  v,  66. 


DEATH  OF  PHOCAS  201 

In  Italy  alone,  things  were  more  cheerful  and 
Phocas    more   popular.     A    peace  was    made  with 
the   Lombards,  which  lasted  some  years,   while  at 
Rome  the  Exarch  of   Ravenna  erected  in   608  in 
the    Forum    a    white    Corinthian    pillar,    with    his 
statue    on    the    top   of  it,    to   the   honour    of  the 
Tyrant,  on  the  site  of  the  famous  equestrian  figure 
of  Domitian  apostrophised  by  Statius.^     Readers  of 
Byron  will  remember  his  reference  to  the  "name- 
less column  with  the  buried  base."^     The  base  of 
this  column  was  actually  uncovered  in  18 13,  and  on 
it  was  found  an  inscription  in  which  the  monument 
is  declared  to  have  been  erected  to  the  Emperor 
^' pro  innumerabilibus  pietatis  ejus  benejiciis  et  pro 
quiete  libertatey^     Towards  the  Popes  Phocas  was 
very  complacent,  no  doubt  to  emphasise  his  dislike  of 
the  Patriarch  Cyriacus,  who  had  protected  the  family 
of  Maurice.    The  unpopularity  of  Phocas  presently 
brought  its  Nemesis.     On  the  invitation  of  some  of 
the  grandees  at  Constantinople,  the  Exarch  of  Africa, 
Heraclius,  a  person  of  high  character,  sent  his  son 
with  a  flotilla  to  the  capital.     A  naval  engagement 
was   fought   there    on    the  4th    of  October    16 10. 
Phocas  was    defeated,  pursued,  and    executed,  to- 
gether with  his  chief  supporters,  their  bodies  were 
burnt,  and  on  the   next  day  the  younger  "Hera- 
clius was  proclaimed  Augustus  by  the  Senate  and 
the  people,  and  crowned  by  the  Patriarch  Sergius."* 

^  Silv.  I.  V.  66  ;  Gregorovius  /.  319  and  330,  note  12.     A  picture 
of  it  is  given  in  my  previous  volume  on  St.  Gregory. 
^  Childe  Harold,  Canto  IV.  ex. 
*  See  Corp.  Inscr.  Lat.  vi.  251.  *  Bury,  op.  at.  206. 


202    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Let  us  now  turn  from  the  Emperor  to  the 
Pope.  St.  Gregory  was  immediately  succeeded  by 
Sabinianus,  a  native  of  Volterra  in  Tuscany, 
whose  father  was  called  Bonus.  He  is  mentioned 
in  several  of  Gregory's  letters,  in  which  he  speaks 
of  him  as  his  dearest  son  [dilectissimus  filius),  as 
his  deacon,  as  a  bearer  of  presents  i^lator  prae- 
sentiu7n),  etc.,  and  as  acting  the  Pope's  agent  in 
various  capacities.  Presently  we  find  him  filling 
the  most  responsible  position  of  all,  namely,  that 
of  Nuncio  at  Constantinople,  which  Gregory  had 
himself  occupied.  Lastly,  it  would  appear  that  he 
was  appointed  Bishop  of  Jadera  in  Dalmatia.'^ 

It  would  seem  that  on  the  death  of  Gregory  he 
became  his  successor,  having  doubtless  ingratiated 
himself  while  resident  at  Constantinople  with  the 
all-powerful  Phocas,  as  he  probably  had  ingratiated 
himself  also  with  the  Exarch  of  Ravenna.  It 
would  fit  in  with  his  having  been  Bishop  of  Jadera 
that  he  was  not  elected  Pope  until  five  months 
after  Gregory's  death,  namely,  on  the  13th  of 
September  604.  At  the  time  of  his  election 
there  seems  to  have  been  a  grievous  famine  in 
Italy,^  and  the  new  Pope,  finding  it  difficult  to 
meet  the  situation,  seems  to  have  blamed  the 
unmeasured  alms  which  Gregory  had  dispensed 
and  his  often  inconsiderate  charity,  and  he  aroused 
the  anger  of  the  crowd  against  Gregory's  memory, 
as   I    have   already    related    in    my    Life   of   Pope 

'  For  more  details  about  Sabinianus,  see  Appendix  III. 
*  Paul,  Diac.  iv.  ch.  g. 


THE  SUCCESSORS  OF  POPE  GREGORY    203 

Grej;ory.  According  to  the  Liber  Pontificalis^  he 
insisted  on  selHng  the  corn  to  the  people  at  what 
they  deemed  an  exorbitant  rate  instead  of  giving  it 
to  them,  and  the  fickle  crowd  turned  once  more  with 
loving  thoughts  to  the  memory  of  their  late  Pope, 
while  the  latter's  successor,  who  only  reigned  for  a 
short  time,  and  died  on  22nd  February  606,  had  to 
be  taken  to  his  burial  furtively,  in  order  to  escape  the 
angry  crowd.  This  is  generally  the  fate  of  the  suc- 
cessors of  spendthrift  rulers.  Onuphrius  Panvinus 
attributes  to  him  the  introduction  of  the  practice  of 
ringing  bells  at  the  Canonical  Hours,  and  at  the 
celebration  of  the  Eucharist.^ 

There  is  considerable  difficulty  about  the 
chronology  and  the  lives  of  the  two  immediate 
successors  of  Pope  Sabinianus,  and  I  am  constrained 
to  think  that  two  Popes  have  in  fact  been  created 
out  of  one  person.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  strange 
that  both  should  have  been  called  Boniface,  which 
was  an  uncommon  name.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  the  practice  had  not  yet  begun  of  Popes 
adopting  titular  names  on  their  accession,  and  at 
this  time  they  were  styled  by  their  real  names. 
Secondly,  while  it  is  curious  that  out  of  so  many 
hundreds  of  available  ''clerks'*  two  of  the  same 
name  should  have  been  distinguished  enough  to  be 
successively  designated  as  Pope,  it  is  still  more 
odd  that  both  of  them  should  have  had  a  father 
called  John.     Again,  what  we  read  of  the  first  of 

^  Vit.  Sabiniani. 

*  Barmby,  Did.  Chi\  Biography.,  iv.  574. 


204    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

the  two,  who  is  generally  known  as  Boniface  the 
Third,  is  very  slight,  and  it  comes  virtually  from 
one  source  only,  and  that  a  not  too  satisfactory 
one,  namely,  \ki^  Liber  Pontificalis.  Thus,  although 
he  is  said  in  that  document  to  have  been  a  Roman, 
he  is  given  the  name  of  John  Cataudioces,  which, 
as  Gregorovius  says,  points  to  his  having  been  of 
Eastern  origin  and  not  a  Roman. ^ 

Again,  he  is  said  to  have  held  a  Synod  in  St. 
Peter's  attended  by  seventy-two  bishops  and  thirty- 
three  Roman  presbyters  and  deacons.  The  number 
of  bishops  here  given,  points  to  its  having  been  a 
council  of  importance,  and  a  good  deal  more  than 
a  mere  synod  of  his  metropolitan  province.  This 
being  so,  it  is  very  strange  that  no  record  exists  of 
it  anywhere  else,  and  that  none  of  its  acts  are 
extant.  The  only  thing  recorded  of  this  synod 
by  the  author  of  the  Liber  Pontificalis  is  a  prohibi- 
tion under  anathema  of  the  appointment  of  any 
bishop  to  a  see  until  at  least  three  days  after  the 
death  of  his  predecessor.  This  reads  very  curiously, 
considering  that  Augustine  had  just  before  ap- 
pointed Laurence  as  his  successor  during  his  own 
lifetime,  and  it  has  the  look  of  a  much  later  date. 
Again,  Boniface  the  Third,  although  he  only 
reigned  eight  months  and  twenty-two  days,  is 
said  to  have  consecrated  twenty-one  bishops,  which 
seems  an  excessive  number  when  we  compare  it 
with  what  was  done  by  other  Popes  who  reigned 
much  longer.     It  seems  to  me  that,  in  every  w^ay  we 

^  op.  cit.  It.  ed.  i.  420. 


THE  SUCCESSORS  OF  POPE  GREGORY    205 

look  at  it,  grave  doubts  arise  as  to  such  a  person 
as  Boniface  the  Third  having  existed,  and  that 
his  name  has  been  interpolated,  as  others  have,  into 
the  long  list  of  Popes.  A  reason  for  this  interpola- 
tion may  be  found,  I  think,  in  the  only  other  act  of 
his  reign  recorded  in  the  work  just  cited,  and  which 
has  a  very  suspicious  look.  This  entry  has  been 
seriously  doubted,  and,  if  spurious,  needed  to  be 
attributed  to  some  Pope  otherwise  not  well  known 
and  whose  acts  were  not  otherwise  recorded.  We 
are,  in  fact,  told  that  Phocas  the  Emperor  conferred 
on  him  the  right  to  use  the  style  of  (Ecumenical 
or  Universal  Bishop,  This  is  a  most  improbable 
and  in  fact  incredible  statement,  considering  how 
bitterly  and  persistently  Pope  Gregory,  who  only 
died  two  years  before,  repudiated  any  such  title  as 
utterly  reprehensible.  If  it  had  had  any  basis  we 
should  assuredly  have  had  the  fact  mentioned  by 
some  other  more  or  less  contemporary  writer,  and 
it  would  at  once  have  been  adopted  by  other 
Popes,  while,  as  Gieseler  says,  the  first  occasion  on 
which  it  is  recorded  as  having  been  used  by  a 
Pope  was  much  later,  namely,  about  682-85,  when 
it  occurs  in  the  Liber  Diurnus} 

I  venture  therefore,  with  some  confidence,  to 
urge  that  Boniface  the  Third  was  a  myth,  and 
that  there  was  only  one  Pope  Boniface  at  this 
time,  namely,  the  one  usually  called  Boniface  the 
Fourth,  who,  in  my  view,  immediately  succeeded 
Sabinianus,  and  who  had  previously  been  a 
*  See  Gieseler,  Eng.  tr.  i.  p.  344,  note. 


206    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

considerable  personage  and  a  prot6g6  of  Pope 
Gregory. 

A  Boniface  occurs  several  times  in  Gregory's 
letters/  On  the  death  of  Sabinianus,  Boniface  was 
appointed  his  successor  as  Pope,  doubtless  by  the 
influence  of  Phocas,  who  must  have  known  him 
well,  for,  like  his  predecessors,  he  had  filled  the 
office  of  Papal  Nuncio  at  the  Imperial  Court. 

Boniface  was  a  Marsian  from  Valeria,  and  the 
son  of  a  doctor  named  John.^  His  name  is  closely 
connected  with  the  history  of  the  famous  ancient 
Temple  of  all  the  Gods,  known  as  the  Pantheon, 
which  was  first  mentioned  under  the  name  Pan- 
theum  in  a  document  of  the  reign  of  Nero.^  At 
the  time  we  are  dealing  with  it  had  doubtless  been 
vacant  and  shut  up  for  a  good  many  years. 

Few  people  who  have  visited  that  marvellous 
triumph  of  the  architect's  skill  realise  that  it  is 
not  merely  the  only  building  of  anything  like  the 
same  aee  which  has  remained  intact,  but  that  it 
has  (save  for  a  limited  interval)  been  continuously 
occupied  for  nineteen  hundred  years.  It  was  built 
by  Agrippa,  the  cherished  companion  of  the 
Emperor  Augustus,  who  afterwards  erected  its 
splendid  vestibule  and  covered  both  the  cupola 
and  the  roof  of  the  temple  with  shining  bronze, 
which  was  carried  away  in  part  by  the  Emperor 
Constans  ii.  when  he  visited  Rome  in  668,  while 
the  rest  was  melted  by  Pope  Urban   the  Eighth, 

1  See  Appendix  III.  ^  /^^-^^^ /3^„^,  y^^,  Boniface  IV. 

'  Gregorovius  I.  435,  note. 


THE  SUCCESSORS  OF  POPE  GREGORY    207 

whose  name  of  Barberini  tempted  a  wit  to  make, 
perhaps,  the  most  famous  of  all  pasquinades  on 
the  subject  of  the  vandalism,  "  Quod  non  fecerunt 
Bai'bari,  fecerttnt  Barber iniy  It  is  first  mentioned, 
as  I  said,  under  its  present  name  (Pantheum)  in  a 
document  of  the  year  59  a.d.,  of  the  time  of  Nero, 
and  is  also  referred  to  by  Pliny  and  Dion  Cassius. 
The  latter  tells  us  how  among  the  other  gods 
whose  statues  were  worshipped  there  was  the 
deified  Julius  Csesar  —  the  one  mortal  who  had 
secured  a  place  in  the  gathering  of  the  great 
deities,  and  notably  of  Jupiter  Ultor,  and  Cybele, 
the  mother  of  the  gods,  of  Mars  and  Venus/ 

On  the  conversion  of  the  Emperors  to  the 
Christian  faith  the  old  temples  were  shut  up  and 
the  statues  of  the  gods  were  probably  removed, 
while  for  two  hundred  years  the  buildings  were 
mostly  closed,  and  among  them  no  doubt  the 
Pantheon. 

We  read  in  the  Liber  Pontificalis  that  Pope 
Boniface  asked  the  Emperor  Phocas  to  give  him 
the  Pantheon,  and  having  secured  it  he  deter- 
mined to  rededicate  it  to  the  Virgin  and  Martyrs 
{Maria  ad  Maj^tyres)}     A  ring  of  altars  took  the 

^  Gree^orovius  I.  422. 

*  Paul,  Diac.  iv.  ch.  37.  Dr.  Bright,  referring  to  similar  instances 
of  rededication,  says  :  "  It  had  already  been  carried  out  as  to  a  temple 
at  Novara  in  the  early  part  of  the  sixth  century  (see  Ennodius,  Dictio 
2,  and  Carm.  ii.  11) — 

'  Perdidii  antiquum  guts  religione  sacellum^ 

Numinibus  pulsis  quod  bene  numen  habet  ? ' 

So  also  in  the  case  of  the  circular  temple  of  Romulus,  son  of  Maxentius 

(on  the  northern  side  of  the  Roman  Forum),  dedicated  in  527  by  Felix 

the  Third  or  Fourth  to  SS.  Cosmas  and  Damian  "  {op.  cit,  p.  79,  note  2). 


208    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

place  of  the  pedestals  where  the  gods  had  stood. 
At  the  new  dedication,  the  Pope  summoned  the 
clergy,  and  they  walked  in  solemn  procession 
bearing  the  cross,  sang  psalms  and  litanies,  and 
in  the  vivid  imagination  of  the  Romans,  the 
demons  and  devils  who  previously  possessed  the 
building,  and  were  represented  by  the  dispossessed 
gods,  fled  away  discomfited,  as  the  choir  sang 
Gloria  in  excelsis,  while  the  Pope  aspersed  the 
building  with  holy  water.^  It  is  said  that  twenty- 
eight  cart-loads  of  relics,  doubtless  brought  from 
the  Catacombs,  were  conveyed  to  the  church  at  its 
dedication,  while  the  magnificent  services  which 
then  took  place  were  the  origin  of  the  famous 
festival  of  All  Souls.^ 

We  will  now  return  again  to  England  and  its 
Archbishop,  Laurence.  We  have  seen  how  he 
was  consecrated  as  his  successor  by  Augustine. 
He  was  in  priest's  orders,  and  was  the  latter's 
confidential  friend,  and  had  been  selected  by  him 
to  convey  to  the  Pope  the  account  of  his  doings  in 
Britain.  Bede  tells  us  that  he  vigorously  strength- 
ened the  foundations  of  the  Church  he  had  seen 
so  firmly  laid,  by  his  exhortations  and  his  pious 
activity,  and  this  not  only  with  the  English,  but 
also  the  British  and  the  Scottish  tribes  inhabiting 
Ireland,  among  whom,  as  among  the  Britons, 
"were  many  things  unchurchlike,  especially  in 
regard  to  the  celebration  of  Easter."  In  con- 
junction with  his  fellow-bishops  he  sent  the  Scots 

^  Gregorovius  I.  422.  *  Smith,  Diet,  of  Christ.  Biog.  i.  329. 


ST.  LAURExNCE'S  LETTER  TO  THE  SCOTS   209 

a  hortatory  letter,  bidding  them  keep  the  unity  of 
peace  and  of  Catholic  observance  with  the  Church 
of  Christ  in  other  parts  of  the  world.  The  letter 
is  headed  : — 

"  To  our  dear  brethren,  the  Lords  Bishops  and 
Abbots  throughout  the  land  of  the  Scots"  [that  is, 
of  course,  the  Irish  Scots].  "  Laurence,  Mellitus, 
and  Justus,  Bishops,  servants  of  God's  servants  : 

"  Having  been  sent  by  the  Apostolic  See  to 
preach  to  the  heathen  tribes  in  these  Western  regions, 
according  to  the  usage  of  that  See  all  over  the 
world,  we  have  been  permitted  to  make  an  entrance 
into  this  island  of  Britain.  Before  we  knew  these 
parts,  we,  supposing  that  they  walked  according  to 
the  custom  of  the  Universal  Church,  held  in  great 
reverence  for  their  sanctity  both  the  Britons  and 
the  Scots  ;  but  when  we  came  to  know  the  Britons, 
we  thought  that  the  Scots  must  be  better  than  they. 
Through  Bishop  Dagan,  however,  who  came  to  this 
island,  and  through  the  Abbot  Columban,  who 
came  to  Gaul,  we  have  learnt  that  the  Scots  are 
not  at  all  different  in  their  ways  from  the  Britons. 
For  when  Bishop  Dagan  came  to  us,  he  not  only 
refused  to  eat  with  us,  but  refused  to  eat  at  all  in 
the  same  lodging  where  we  ate."^ 

This  Dagan  has  been  identified,  says  Plummer, 
with  Bishop  Dagan  of  Inbher  Daeile  (now  Enner- 
eilly.  County  Wicklow),  whose  death  is  given  by  the 
Four  Masters  and  the  Chron.  Scot,  in  the  year  639, 
and  who  is  commemorated  on  September  13,  in  the 

'  Bede,  ii.  4. 
14 


2 to    THE  END  OP  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Fdlire  and  Martyrology  of  Donegal,  and  also  on 
1 2th  March,  which  Colgan  thought  was  the  day 
of  his  translation/  Bishop  Brown  reminds  us  that 
in  the  Stowe  Missal  is  a  very  ancient  list  of  saints 
to  be  commemorated,  and  in  it  Dagan's  name  occurs 
next  but  one  to  those  of  Laurentius,  Mellitus,  and 
Justus.  He  further  remarks  that  the  work  was  a 
Scotic  {i.e.  an  Irish)  work,  and  the  list  a  Scotic 
list,  which  shows  an  unexpected  friendliness  to 
the  English  prelates.  It  is  noteworthy,  however, 
that  the  name  of  Augustine  is  omitted  from  the 
altar  list.^ 

Laurence  and  his  fellow-bishops  also  sent  a 
joint  letter  to  the  British  bishops  suitable  to  their 
degree  [sico  gradui  condignas)  to  confirm  them 
in  the  Catholic  unity,  but,  as  Bede  says,  "how 
much  good  these  proceedings  did,  present  circum- 
stances show."^ 

Gocelin  also  tells  us  that  an  Irish  archbishop, 
by  name  Terenanus,  was  attracted  to  England  by 
the  fame  of  Laurentius,  and  was  by  him  converted 
to  the  true  computation  of  Easter.  Terenanus  was 
identified  by  Ware  with  an  Archbishop  of  Armagh 
named  MacLaisre.* 

About  the  year  6io,  Bishop  Mellitus  is  said  to 
have  gone  to  Rome  to  confer  with  Pope  Boniface 
about  the  affairs  of  the  English  Church,  and  Bede 
says  he  took  part  in  a  synod  held  at  Rome  for 
better  regulating   the    monastic   life.     Bede    turns 

^  Plummer's  Bede,  vol.  ii.  p.  83,  note. 

*  Augustine  and  His  Companions,  p.  155. 

2  Op.  cit.  ii.  4.  ■•  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  62. 


THE  SUPPOSED  ROMAN  SYNOD  OF  6io      21 1 

aside  to  remind  us  how,  as  we  have  seen,  it  was  this 
Pope  Boniface  who  obtained  a  grant  of  the  Pantheon 
at  Rome  from  the  Emperor  Phocas,  and  dedicated  it 
as  a  Christian  church  to  the  Virgin  and  all  Martyrs.^ 
The  synod  in  question,  according  to  him,  was 
held  on  27th  February  610,  and  he  adds  that  the 
English  bishop  was  present  at  it,  "in  order  to  add 
the  weight  of  the  subscription  of  Mellitus  to  what- 
ever was  canonically  decreed,"  and  to  bring  the 
decrees  back  to  Britain  to  be  delivered  to  the 
English  Churches  for  their  observance,  together 
with  letters  addressed  by  the  aforesaid  Pontiff  to 
Laurence  the  Archbishop,  beloved  of  God  and  the 
clergy  in  general,  and  also  to  King  ^thelberht 
and  the  English  people.^  There  are  some  serious 
difficulties  about  this  statement  of  Bede.  It  is  a 
very  extraordinary  fact  that  no  such  Council  is 
mentioned  anywhere  else,  and  Labb6  relies  for  his 
account  of  it  on  Bede's  statement  alone.  Not  a 
word  about  it  is  said  in  the  Liber  Pontijicalis, 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  mentions  a  synod 
alleged  to  have  been  held  by  Boniface  the  Third, 
who  was  probably  a  myth,  and  who  is  said  to  have 
died  in  607.  I  cannot  avoid  the  conclusion  that 
Bede's  statements  on  the  subject  of  this  Council, 
and  on  the  visit  of  Mellitus  to  Rome,  are  not  to 
be  relied  upon,  and  were  perhaps  interpolations. 
It  will  be  noted  as  ominous  of  this  fact  that  the 
letter  Bede  refers  to  as  having  been  written  by  the 
Pope  to  Laurentius  is  not  given  by  him  and  is 
1  Bede,  ii.  4.  ^  lb. 


212    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

no  longer  extant,  while  that  said  to  have  been 
written  to  ^thelberht  is  also  lost,  and  has  been 
replaced  by  a  forged  one  in  the  series  of  forgeries 
preserved  by  William  of  Malmesbury  and  meant  to 
sustain  the  claims  of  Canterbury  against  those  of 
York.^  A  second  letter  from  the  same  Pope  to 
^thelberht,  dated  27th  February  611,  and  pre- 
served by  Thomas  of  Elmham,  is  also  forged.^ 
Both  the  letter  to  ^thelberht  given  by  Malmesbury 
and  the  alleged  acts  of  the  Synod  of  Rome  in  610, 
which  last  occur  in  two  recensions,  are  described 
by  Haddan  and  Stubbs  as  spurious.^  In  addition, 
may  I  add,  that  if  Mellitus  had  visited  Rome  at 
this  time,  when  he  was  a  bishop  with  a  young  and 
difficult  see  to  manage,  it  must  have  been  on  some 
very  critical  business,  and  it  is  strange  that  he  did 
not  return  with  a  pall  for  Laurence,  so  as  firmly  to 
establish  the  latter's  metropolitan  rank.  It  was  in 
the  same  year  that  the  tyrant  Phocas  died,  and  was 
succeeded  as  Emperor  by  Heraclius. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  Abbey  Church  of  St.  Peter 
and  Paul  at  Canterbury  was  not  completed  at  the 
death  of  Augustine,  and  was  consecrated  by  Arch- 
bishop Laurence.^  Thomas  of  Elmham  says  it  was 
dedicated  in  613.^  We  have  no  means  of  knowing 
what  this  church  was  like,  for  it  was  apparently 
destroyed  in  the  rebuilding  of  the  eleventh  century, 
as  graphically  described  by  Gocelin  in  his  account 
of  the   translation   of  St.    Augustine's    remains  as 

^  Plummer's  Bede,  ii.  p.  84.  *  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  67. 

3  iii.  62-65.  ■*  Bede,  ii.  3. 

*  Op.  cit.  p.  131. 


DEATH  OF  KING  .ETHELBERHT  213 

above  given. ^     It  was  doubtless  a  simple  basilica. 

^thelberht,    King    of    Kent,    died    on    the    24th 

February  616.^     Bede  says  that  y^thelberht's  death 

took  place  in  the  twenty-first  year  after  the  sending 

of  Augustine,  which,  Mr,  Mason  says,  can  only  be 

made  correct  by  counting  from  the  first  setting  out  of 

the  missionaries,^    He  was  buried  in  iht. portims  or 

transeptal  chapel  of  St.  Martin,  in  the  Church  of  the 

Monastery  of  St.   Peter  and   St,    Paul,   afterwards 

known  as   St,   Augustine's,  where  his  wife  Queen 

Bertha  and  her  chaplain  Liudhard  were  also  buried.* 

Thomas  of  Elmham  thus  reports  his  epitaph  : — 

"  Rex  ^thelbertus  hie  clauditur  in  poliandro. 
Fana  pians  certus  Christo  meat  absque  meandro." 

In  later  times  he  was  held  to  be  a  saint,  and  in 
the  plan  of  St.  Augustine's  Monastery  previously 
mentioned  there  is  represented  a  shrine  above  the 
high  altar  inscribed  Scs  Ethelbertus.  In  1325  his 
name  was  added  to  those  of  SS.  Peter  and  Paul 
and  St.  Augustine  in  the  dedication  of  the  high 
altar.^  Among  the  other  benefits,  says  Bede, 
which  yEthelberht's  thoughtfulness  conferred  on 
his  people,  he  drew  up  for  them,  in  concert  with 
his  Witenagemot,  or  Great  Council  of  the  Wise, 
a  code  of  judicial  decisions  after  the  manner  of 
the  Romans  i^decreta  judiciorimi  juxta  exempla 
Romanoruni),  which  are  still  extant  in  the  English 
language.  The  code  commences  with  the  penalties 
to  be  inflicted  on  those  who  did  injury  to  Church 

^  Ante^  p.  179,  etc.  ^  Bede,  ii.  5. 

^  Op.  cit.  109,  n<Ue.  ■*  Bede,  ii.  5. 

*  Brown,  The  Christian  Church.,  etc.,  17  and  18. 


2  14    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

property  or  to  that  of  Church  dignitaries,  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons.  In  regard  to  Church  pro- 
perty it  was  enacted  that  the  reparation  was  to 
be  twelve  times  the  value.  In  that  of  a  bishop 
elevenfold,  in  that  of  a  priest  ninefold,  of  a  deacon 
sixfold,  while  of  clerks  (clerici)  (by  whom  those  in 
the  lesser  orders  are  doubtless  meant)  threefold. 
The  breach  of  Church  frith,  Cyric  frith  [i.e.  the 
peace  or  privilege  of  the  Church)  was  charged 
twofold,  while  Maethelfrith  [i.e.  the  peace  of  the 
people's  assembly,  volksversammlungsfriede^i)  was 
similarly  assessed.^ 

It  is  plain  from  Bede's  statements  that  iEthel- 
berht  gave  the  new  church  considerable  property. 
The  old  deeds  and  documents  of  the  Canterbury 
churches  were,  however,  largely,  if  not  entirely, 
destroyed  by  fire — those  at  St.  Augustine's  by 
the  fire  in  1087,  when  we  are  expressly  told  that 
the  charters  of  the  Abbey  were  destroyed. 

Charters,  professing  to  be  grants  of  lands 
from  ^thelberht  to  the  Abbey  of  St.  Augustine, 
are  preserved  by  Thomas  of  Elmham,  as  well  as 
a  grant  of  privileges  from  St.  Augustine  to  the 
same  foundation,  and  known  from  its  seal  as  the 
Bulla  Plumbea.  These  four  documents  are  now 
universally  held  to  be  spurious.  I  have  discussed 
them  in  the  "  Introduction."  The  three  former 
may,  however,   possibly  in  part  preserve  the  sub- 

^  F.  Liebermann,  Die  Gesetze  der  Angelsachsen,  i.  p.  3.  The 
word  "  doom "  was  the  primitive  name  for  law  among  the  Anglo- 
Saxons,  and  was  displaced  later  by  the  Scandinavian  laga  {i.e.  law) 
(Plummer,  ii.  p.  87). 


THE  CHARTERS  OF  KING  iETHELBERHT    2 1  $ 

stance  of  the  contents  of  documents  burnt  at  the 
fire  ;  of  this  we  have  no  evidence.  What  is  chiefly- 
valuable  in  them  is  the  description  of  the  boundaries 
of  those  parts  of  the  Abbey  property,  which  probably 
formed  its  oldest  possession.  The  Bulla  Plumbea  is 
no  doubt  entirely  a  sophistication  dating  from  much 
later  times,  when  the  practice  of  forging  documents 
in  support  of  monastic  privileges  had  become 
common. 

Another  grant  professes  to  convey  the  Manor 
of  Tillingham  from  ^thelberht  to  Bishop  Mellitus 
and  the  Monastery  of  St.  Paul's  at  London.^  This 
is  also  spurious.  I  have  discussed  it  in  the  Intro- 
duction. Bishop  Brown  tells  us  that  the  Manor  of 
Tillingham,  mentioned  in  the  document,  still  belongs 
to  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  St.  Paul's,  showing 
that  even  where  the  charter  is  false  the  reference 
to  the  grant  of  the  particular  lands  may  have  a  real 
foundation. 

There  remains  a  fifth  charter,^  which  has  been 
generally  treated  as  genuine,  and  which  professes 
to  convey  certain  lands  at  Rochester  from  King 
^.thelberht  to  Justus,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  and 
the  Church  of  St.  Andrew,  with  the  approval  of  all 
his  grandees  and  of  Bishop  Laurence.  This  docu- 
ment seems  to  me  to  be  also  a  clear  forgery.^  Its 
only  statement  of  any  value  is  inserted  in  Anglo- 
Saxon,  and  describes  the  boundaries  conveyed,  and 
runs  thus  :  ''  fram  Suthgeate  west,  andlanges  wealles, 

^  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  pp.  59  and  60. 

•  lb.  pp.  52  and  53.  *  Vide  Introduction. 


2i6    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

oth  northlanan  to  straete  ;  and  swa  east  fram  straete 
oth  doddinghyrnan  ongean  bT-adgeat^ 

iEthelberht  was  duly  registered  among  the 
saints,  and  at  least  one  miracle  was  attributed  to 
him.^  His  name-day  was  the  24th  of  February, 
under  which  lives  of  him  are  entered  in  the  Acta 
Sancto^mm.  His  remains,  as  we  have  seen,  were 
translated  to  the  new  Church  of  St.  Augustine's 
when  the  other  kings  and  saints  were  moved,  and 
a  notice  of  the  translation  occurs  in  the  Acta  Sand. 
vi.  439,  24th  May,  headed  "  Translatio  et  Laus 
S.  Ethelberti^  primi  Angloj'urii  Regis  Christianiy 

In  the  picture  of  the  sacrarium  at  St.  Augustine's 
given  by  Dugdale,  above  referred  to,^  the  relics  of 
iEthelberht,  as  I  have  said,  are  put  in  the  place 
of  honour  immediately  above  the  altar,  and  their 
receptacle  is  inscribed  Scs  Ethelbertus. 

The  death  of  ^Ethelberht  in  616  was  nearly 
coincident  with  great  changes  in  the  distribution 
of  political  power  on  the  Continent.  Let  us  first 
turn  to  the  Empire  and  its  ruler. 

We  have  seen  how  the  tyrant  Phocas  was  de- 
throned and  succeeded  by  Heraclius.  Heraclius  was 
one  of  the  remarkable  men  by  whose  character  and 
genius  the  Empire  of  Byzantium  was  several  times 
lifted  for  a  short  interval  out  of  the  slough  of  decay  to 
which  it  had  a  continual  tendency  to  revert,  and  who 
gave  it  a  very  considerable  new  life.  Professor  Bury 
has  explained  how  it  was  that  the  earlier  years  of  his 
reign  showed  little  proof  of  the  vigour  and  power  he 

^  See  Hardy's  Catalogue^  i.  584.  *  Ante,  p.  213. 


THE  WAR  OF  HERACLIUS  217 

possessed,  and  how  this  was  due  to  lack  of  money 
and  of  soldiers,  and  to  the  intrigues  of  a  dissipated 
aristocracy  at  home.  Meanwhile,  the  Persians,  under 
their  famous  ruler  Chosroes,  continued  their  merci- 
less campaign.  They  invaded  Syria  and  captured 
Damascus  in  6 1 3  or  6 1 4,  Palestine  was  then  invaded 
and  Jerusalem  taken,  the  Patriarch  being  carried  off 
into  captivity,  and  the  Cross,  "  the  Wood  "  as  it  was 
called,  was  taken  off  to  Persia.  After  the  surrender 
of  the  city  there  was  an  outbreak  of  the  Christian 
citizens  and  a  massacre  of  the  Persians.  This  was 
terribly  revenged,  and  we  are  told  that  the  Jews, 
whose  hatred  had  been  aroused  to  boiling-point  by 
the  cruelty  they  had  suffered,  ransomed  90,000 
Christian  prisoners  and  then  slaughtered  them. 

Egypt  was  next  conquered,  and,  as  elsewhere, 
the  path  of  the  Persians  was  smoothed  by  the 
bitter  rivalries  of  the  Christian  sects,  Monophysites, 
Jacobites,  and  Melchites  (the  Royal  party),  against 
each  other  and  against  the  Jews. 

After  their  capture  of  Egypt  the  Persians 
entered  Asia  Minor  and  advanced  to  Chalcedon, 
where  an  attempt  at  securing  peace  was  made  by 
Heraclius  and  the  Persian  general  Shahan,  which 
so  exasperated  the  latter's  master  that  he  had  him 
flayed  alive.  Heraclius  began  to  despair,  and 
especially  was  he  embarrassed  by  the  moral  rotten- 
ness and  the  want  of  patriotism  of  the  population 
of  the  capital,  where,  to  add  to  other  troubles,  the 
capture  of  Jerusalem  had  caused  a  famine  which 
was  followed  by  a  pestilence.     He  actually  con- 


2i8    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

templated  moving  the  capita!  to  Carthage,  but 
was  dissuaded  by  another  personage  who  at  this 
time  showed  marked  ability,  courage,  and  good 
sense,  his  friend  the  Patriarch  Sergius.  The  latter 
aroused  a  widespread  religious  fervour  among  the 
Christians,  who  had  been  specially  moved  by  the 
capture  of  what  they  deemed  the  most  precious  relic 
in  the  world,  the  Holy  Rood.  Meanwhile,  the  clergy 
offered  Heraclius  a  larger  loan  with  which  to  pro- 
secute what  had  become  a  religious  war,  and  the  gold 
and  silver  plate  of  the  Church  were  melted  and  con- 
verted into  coin  to  help  the  cause.  The  public  fervour 
was  increased  by  the  almost  incredible  insolence  of 
the  letters  of  Chosroes,  who  spoke  of  the  Empire 
and  its  ruler  in  most  contemptuous  terms. 

Things  being  now  ready  for  what  was  in  effect 
a  great  crusade,  Heraclius  secured  his  flank  by 
making  a  very  useful  if  humiliating  peace  with  the 
Avars.  Meanwhile  the  Persians,  leaving  Chalcedon, 
made  an  assault  on  Constantinople  itself,  but  were 
utterly  beaten,  with  the  loss  of  four  thousand  men 
and  their  ships.  It  was  on  the  day  after  Easter, 
in  622,  that  Heraclius  sailed  from  Constantinople. 
Dr.  Bury  says  that  George  of  Pisidia  delivered  an 
oration  in  which  he  foretold  that  he  would  redden 
his  black  leggings  in  Persian  blood,  and  the  army 
was  accompanied  by  a  famous  image  of  the  Virgin 
which,  it  was  said,  had  not  been  made  with  hands. 
It  is  no  part  of  my  purpose  to  detail  the  magnificent 
series  of  victorious  campaigns  in  which  Heraclius 
justified   his  reputation,   during  which    he  had   to 


PEACE  WITH  THE  PERSIANS  219 

face  the  treachery  of  the  Avar  Khan,  who  took 
advantage  of  his  necessities  to  try  and  capture 
Constantinople.  This  was  in  626.  Every  obstacle 
gave  way  before  his  pertinacity,  skill,  and  resource- 
fulness. Chosroes,  retaining  his  indomitable  ob- 
stinacy and  cruelty  to  the  end,  was  at  length 
captured  and  starved  to  death  at  the  instance  of 
his  eldest  son  Siroes,  whom  he  had  displaced  in 
favour  of  the  son  of  his  young  and  favourite  wife 
Shirin,  who  with  all  her  children  were  executed. 

By  the  terms  of  peace  all  the  Roman  provinces 
were  restored,  as  were  all  Roman  captives,  together 
with  what  the  crowd  probably  thought  the  crown  of 
their  good  fortune,  namely,  the  Holy  Rood.  "  The 
victor  sent  to  the  Imperial  Court,"  says  Dr.  Bury, 
"a  song-  of  exultation  over  the  fall  of  'Chosroes 
Iscariot,'  the  blasphemer  who  had  gone  to  burn  for 
ever  in  the  flames  of  hell."^  The  people  of  the 
capital  went  out  to  meet  the  returning  hero  with 
taper  processions  and  myrtle  branches,  and  he  was 
received  by  Sergius  in  the  Church  of  St.  Sophia, 
where  "the  true  Cross"  was  solemnly  uplifted,  and 
the  ceremony  followed  the  pattern  of  the  ancient 
triumphs  in  the  capital. 

Once  more  and  for  the  last  time  the  old 
frontiers  of  Rome  were  stretched  out  eastwards  to 
their  farthest  limit,  while  the  great  and  pompous 
Persian  Empire,  which  had  threatened  it  so  long, 
was  humbled  in  the  dust.  Heraclius  adopted  a 
new  policy  elsewhere  which  had  far-reaching  effects. 

^  Bury,  Later  Roman  Empire^  ii,  207-245. 


2  20    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

In  order  to  meet  the  continual  danger  of  attacks 
from  the  ruthless  Avars,  he  invited  the  Slavonians 
(Servians  and  Croats)  to  cross  the  Danube  and  to 
plant  themselves  in  the  Balkan  lands,  to  act  as  a 
cushion  between  the  Empire  and  their  sleepless 
enemy. 

The  Emperor  was  not  content  to  meet  and 
thwart  and  defeat  the  external  enemies  of  the 
Empire,  he  tried  also  very  strenuously  to  restore  its 
internal  peace,  which  was  continually  threatened 
by  feuds.  Christendom  was  then  divided,  as  on 
many  other  occasions,  by  differences  mainly  de- 
pending on  very  abstruse  metaphysical  issues, 
which  were  all  the  more  dangerous  and  exciting 
from  the  fact  of  their  absolute  divorce  from 
questions  of  morality  or  conduct  or  worship. 
Most  of  them  arose  out  of  the  great  difficulty  of 
reconciling  the  complete  Unity  of  the  Divine  and 
human  natures  of  Christ,  with  the  continued 
separate  existence  of  two  persons,  a  problem 
which  naturally  taxed  all  the  resources  of  dialectical 
casuistry  to  solve.  Sergius  the  Patriarch  of 
Constantinople  discovered  a  formula  by  which  it 
was  hoped  the  contending  sects  might  be  united, 
and  in  which,  while  allowing  the  existence  of  two 
persons  in  the  God-man  Christ,  he  claimed  that 
there  was  only  one  will  directing  his  activities. 
This  view  was  accepted  by  the  Monophysites  and 
other  similar  sects,  who  abounded  in  Egypt  and 
Africa,  and  was  also  accepted  by  three  of  the 
other    Patriarchs,    including   the    Pope    of   Rome. 


HERACLIUS  AND  MONOTHELISM         221 

The  only  one  who  stood  out  was  the  Patriarch  of 
Jerusalem. 

The  opportunity  was  eagerly  seized  by 
Heraclius,  who,  like  probably  all  the  more  prudent 
and  foreseeing  politicians  and  theologians  of  the 
time,  was  anxious  to  repair  the  riven  garment  of 
the  Church,  and  under  his  patronage  and  by  his 
sanction  a  pronouncement  was  published  for- 
bidding in  future  the  teaching  of  a  double  will  in 
Christ,  and  affirming  His  possession  of  a  single  will 
only.  This  view  was  called  Monothelism,  and  the 
pronouncement  was  called  an  Ecthesis.  It  led, 
after  the  death  of  Heraclius,  as  we  shall  see 
presently,  to  some  grave  consequences. 

While  Heraclius  thus  applied  what  proved  an 
ephemeral  remedy  to  the  most  important  schism  in 
the  Church,  he  continued  the  merciless  campaign  of 
his  predecessor  against  the  Jews.  It  is  difficult 
in  our  day  to  appreciate  the  merits  of  the  quarrel. 
It  was  not  entirely  religious  fanaticism,  although 
that  had  much  to  do  with  it  on  either  side.  To 
the  civil  authorities  there  was  a  further  question. 
The  Jews  had  greatly  increased  in  numbers,  wealth, 
and  importance,  in  Greece,  Africa,  Spain,  Georgia, 
and  Arabia ;  and  with  this  increase  in  their  weight 
and  power,  and  the  ever-present  signs  of  decay  in 
the  affairs  of  the  Empire,  there  had  revived  among 
them  a  very  strong  determination  "  to  restore  the 
throne  of  David "  under  their  long-expected 
Messiah.  They  were  also  aggressive  and  con- 
tinually causing  riots.       On    the    other   hand,    we 


22  2    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

have  had  in  our  day  evidences  in  the  Russian 
"  pogroms  "  of  the  unmitigated  and  ruthless  cruelty 
with  which  Jews  can  be  treated  and  were  treated 
by  the  fanatical  Christians  of  the  20th  century. 
While  Heraclius  held  rule  there  were  massacres 
of  Jews  in  Palestine  and  at  Edessa,  and  the 
survivors  fled  to  Arabia.  Compulsory  baptism 
was  forced  upon  them,  while  the  Emperor  in- 
duced the  Visigothic  King  Sisibut,  with  whom  he 
made  a  treaty,  to  follow  his  example.  The  wealth 
of  the  Jews  also  excited  the  rapacity  of  the  mob. 
They  were  the  great  money-lenders,  slave-dealers, 
brothel-keepers,  and  generally  the  purveyors  of 
what  was  unsavoury,  and  were  accused  of  pursuing 
any  occupation  in  which  money  was  to  be  made. 
On  the  other  hand,  we  have  an  account  of  a  famous 
Jew  of  Tiberias  named  Benjamin,  who  was  reputed 
to  have  been  a  persecutor  of  the  Christians,  and 
who  consented  at  the  request  of  Heraclius  to  be 
baptized.  He  honoured  Heraclius  and  his  retinue 
with  a  princely  entertainment  on  their  way  to 
Jerusalem  in  629.  This  type  of  recreant  occurs 
too  frequently  in  the  history  of  "  the  chosen  race." 

So  much  for  the  history  of  the  Empire  at  this 
time.  The  death  of  yEthelberht  was  also  nearly 
coincident  with  a  great  change  in  the  distribution 
of  political  power  in  Gaul.  As  we  have  seen, 
Chlothaire,  the  King  of  Neustria,  had  been  often 
defeated  by  his  aunt  Brunichildis,  acting  as  the  real 
ruler  of  the  two  nations  of  Burgundy  and  Austrasia 
in    the    name    and    on    behalf    of   her   grandsons, 


STATE  OF  GAUL  223 

Theoderic  and  Theodebert,  and  his  realm  had  been 
reduced  to  small  proportions.  She  herself  became 
more  ambitious  and  exacting  as  she  became  older. 
In  her  dealincTS  with  the  turbulent  and  ruthless 
chieftains  whose  ambitions  and  truculence  would 
have  reduced  the  State  to  anarchy  she  never 
flinched,  and  she  got  rid  of  one  after  another — 
inter  alia,  she  put  to  death  the  patrician  Egila, 
and  banished  Desiderius,  Bishop  of  Vienne,  to  an 
island  in  the  Mediterranean  and  is  reported  to  have 
secured  his  death  ;  while  she  appointed  Protadius  as 
Mayor  of  the  Palace,  the  most  dignified  office  under 
the  Crown.  He  was  a  Gallo-Roman,  who  levied 
the  taxes  with  great  rigour. 

Meanwhile,  the  two  boy  kings  quarrelled  about 
their  rights  to  certain  border  districts,  notably  that 
of  Alsace,  a  name  which  now  appears  for  the  first 
time,  and  which  was  claimed  by  Theodebert  of 
Austrasia,  or  rather  by  the  great  chiefs  who 
dominated  him,  and  who  were  much  more  in- 
dependent than  those  of  Burgundy.  A  war  ensued, 
and  two  fierce  battles  took  place  at  Toul  and 
Tolbiac,  in  both  of  which  Theodebert  was  defeated. 
He  was  captured,  taken  to  Chalons-sur-Saone,  and 
there  put  to  death  by  his  brother,  who  himself  died  a 
few  months  later  of  a  sudden  disease  which  men  attri- 
buted to  "the  Providence  that  avenges  fratricide." 

The  grandees  of  Austrasia  were  determined  no 
longer  to  support  the  yoke  of  their  terrible  mistress, 
and  headed  by  Arnulf,  Bishop  of  Metz,  and  Pepin, 
ancestor  of  the  Carlovingians,  they  made  an  alliance 


2  24    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINKS  MISSION 

with  Chlothaire  of  Neustria.  In  the  battle  which 
followed,  the  Burgundians  abandoned  her.  She 
was  captured,  and  suffered  gross  indignity.  They 
put  the  aged  Queen  on  a  camel  and  made  sport  of 
her  for  the  army,  tortured  her  for  three  days,  and 
then,  tying  her  by  a  leg  and  arm  to  a  horse's  tail, 
dragged  her  along  at  a  furious  gallop  till  she  was 
reduced  to  a  shapeless  mass.  This  was  in  613. 
Thus  did  Chlothaire  revenge  his  infamous  mother 
and  his  own  bitter  reverses.  Thus  also  passed 
away  the  greatest  Queen  the  world  had  seen  for 
a  long  time,  and  certainly  the  greatest  personage 
of  this  time  save  Pope  Gregory  and  Heraclius  the 
Emperor.  I  will  sum  up  the  verdict  of  the  gifted 
scholars  who  have  combined  under  M.  Lavisse 
to  write  the  latest  history  of  France. 

They  speak  of  her  as  the  most  remarkable 
figure  of  this  terrible  epoch.  Pure  in  her  private 
life,  and  Incapable  of  inciting  her  grandsons  to 
debauchery  in  order  to  retain  control  of  them 
(as  has  been  imputed  to  her),  she  had  the  qualities 
of  a  man  of  affairs  and  a  politician.  She  was 
determined  to  maintain  the  rights  of  the  Crown 
against  the  aristocracy,  and  claimed  the  right  to 
appoint  the  officials  and  to  demand  their  allegiance. 
She  tried  hard  to  keep  alive  the  old  Roman  method 
of  taxation,  and  redistributed  the  taxes  in  the  towns 
so  as  to  relieve  the  poor  and  make  the  rich  pay 
their  due  share.  She  demanded  military  service 
from  all  who  owed  it.  She  dispensed  an  even 
justice  to  all,  and  attempted  to  stop  the  custom  of 


QUEEN  BRUNICniLDIS  225 

continual  division  of  property  in  favour  of  the 
succession  of  the  eldest  son.  She  carried  her 
dominance  into  her  dealings  with  the  Church. 
She  increased  the  endowment  of  bishoprics,  and 
built  a  number  of  new  monasteries,  as  St.  Vincent 
de  Laon,  St.  Martin  of  Autun,  and  perhaps  St. 
Martin  near  Metz  ;  and  as  we  have  seen,  she  carried 
on  an  important  correspondence  with  Pope  Gregory, 
who  pressed  on  her  the  reform  in  discipline  of  the 
Church  in  Gaul.  Meanwhile,  she  insisted  on  the 
rights  of  the  State  to  control  the  monasteries. 
When  Columban  complained  that  the  royal  officers 
had  entered  his  Abbey  of  Luxeuil,  he  was  sent  into 
exile  at  Besan9on,  and  when  he  returned  he  was 
again  seized  and  sent  to  Nantes,  with  the  inten- 
tion of  transporting  him  to  Ireland.  He  went  back, 
however,  to  Burgundy,  and  eventually  evangelised 
the  Alemannians  round  the  Lake  of  Constance. 

Brunichildis,  like  other  great  rulers,  loved  to 
build,  and  tradition  attributes  to  her  the  erection  of 
several  castles,  but  some  at  all  events  which  bear 
her  name,  as  those  at  Cahors  and  Vaudemont  in 
Lorraine,  go  back  to  Roman  times.  She  also 
encouraged  commerce,  and  took  care  of  the  great 
royal  roads,  '''dans  ce7^tain  pays,''  say  our  authors, 
''en  nomme  encore  cellesci  ckaussies  de  Brunehaut 
ou  chaussdes  de  la  Reined  All  her  life  she  set 
before  herself  a  great  ideal,  and  was  not  like  the 
other  Merovingians,  who  were  barbarians,  and 
pursued  by  caprice  and  passion.  She  wished,  while 
maintaining  the  principle  of  absolutism,  to  combine 
15 


2  26    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

with  it  order  and  good  administration/  With  the 
destruction  of  Brunichildis  and  her  grandsons,  the 
empire  of  Chlovis  was  once  more  united  under  one 
ruler,  namely,  Chlothaire  the  Second,  to  whose  reign 
we  shall  return  presently. 

Let  us  now  devote  a  few  sentences  to  Spain. 

Originally  the  Visigothic  monarchy  had  been  an 
elective  one,  but  the  last  two  or  three  occupants 
of  the  throne,  including  Reccared,  had  filled  it  by 
reason  of  their  royal  lineage.  This  was  apparently 
not  entirely  popular,  and  Reccared's  son,  Liuva  the 
Second,  having  been  murdered,  Witteric,  a  leading 
noble  supported  by  the  aristocracy,  and  apparently 
also  by  a  considerable  number  of  people  who  still 
sympathised  with  Arianism,  mounted  the  throne. 
Witteric,  who  reigned  from  603  to  610,  was 
eventually  murdered.  He  kept  up  a  continual 
struggle  against  the  imperial  possessions  in  the 
Peninsula,  and  succeeded  in  ousting  the  Byzantines 
from  Sagontia  on  the  Guadalete.  He  was  succeeded 
by  Gunthimar,  whose  short  reign  of  two  years, 
910-912,  produced  no  notable  events.  Gunthimar 
was  succeeded  by  Sisebut,  who  virtually  evicted  the 
Greeks.  At  his  accession  they  still  held  on  to 
two  strips  of  country,  a  small  piece  in  what  is  the 
modern  Portuguese  province  of  Algarve,  including 
Ossonoba,  and  a  much  larger  strip  along  the  coast 
from  near  Cadiz  to  Cartagena,  of  varying  extent 
inland.  He  conquered  these  districts,  which  in- 
cluded Malaga  and  Assidonia,  the  bishops  of  which 

^  Op.  cit.  ii.  148  and  149. 


REVIVED  ORTHODOXY  IN  SPAIN  227 

appear  for  the  first  time  at  a  Gothic  council,  at 
Seville  in  a.d.  618,  two  years  after  the  peace  by 
which  the  conquests  of  Sisebut  were  assured  to 
him.^  There  only  remained  for  a  few  years  longer 
a  shadowy  foothold  of  the  Greeks  in  the  little 
Algarvian  strip.  This  conquest  made  it  more 
easy  for  close  ties  to  be  drawn  presently  between 
the  Church  in  Italy  and  in  Spain,  which  had  been 
hampered  by  the  difficulty  of  shaping  a  policy 
welcome  to  both  Byzantines  and  Visigoths. 
Sisebut  was  the  first  of  the  Gothic  kings  who 
became  famous  for  his  unflinching  orthodoxy  and 
fiery  zeal.  He  grievously  persecuted  the  Jews  in 
his  dominions,  and,  in  spite  of  the  protests  of  Isidore, 
the  Archbishop  of  Toledo,  he  compelled  large 
numbers  of  them,  against  their  will  and  conscience, 
to  become  Christians.  He  also  passed  laws  pre- 
venting Jews  from  possessing  Christian  slaves,  a 
practice  also  forbidden  by  the  Imperial  Code.  He 
reigned  till  621.  Spain  was  at  this  time  in  the  full 
bloom  of  her  regenerated  Church  life,  after  the  long 
struggle  with  Arianism,  and  was  really  a  much 
more  vigorous  and  intellectual  centre  of  theological 
learning  and  of  culture  than  Italy.  This  was 
largely  due  to  a  wonderful  family  of  three  brothers 
and  one  sister,  the  children  of  a  native  of  Cartagena 
in  Spain,  named  Severianus,  apparently  related  to 
the  great  Gothic  King  Theodoric.  Their  names 
were  Leander,  Isidore,  Fulgentius,  and  Florentina, 
and  all  four  were  styled  saints,  which  was  a  quite 

^  Smith,  Diet.  Christ.  Biog.  iv.  703. 


2  28    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

unique  distinction.  We  have  spoken  before  of 
Leander,  the  Archbishop  of  Seville  and  the  close 
friend  of  St.  Gregory,  the  real  author  of  the  recon- 
ciliation with  the  Arians,  and  a  very  notable  scholar. 
He,  i7iter  alia,  wrote  for  his  sister,  who  became  a 
nun,  a  Manual  or  Rule  on  the  Institution  of  virgins 
and  urging  contempt  for  the  world.  He  was  suc- 
ceeded as  Archbishop  of  Seville  by  his  brother 
Isidore,  the  famous  and  most  industrious  historian, 
annalist,  and  compiler,  and  the  generous  protester 
against  the  persecution  and  forcible  conversion  of 
the  Jews,  which  had  been  stirred  into  fresh  life  by 
the  impetus  given  to  orthodoxy  in  the  recent  con- 
version from  Arianism.  It  will  be  instructive  to 
contrast  the  wealth  of  authors  consulted  by  Isidore 
in  his  works,  and  apparently  contained  in  his  own 
archiepiscopal  library  at  Seville,  of  which  he  says, 

"  Sunt  hie  plura  sacra,  sunt  et  mundalia  plura," 

with  the  extreme  poverty  in  such  materials  used 
by  Gregory,  already  commented  upon.  These 
included,  in  the  field  of  theology,  the  works  of 
Tertullian,  Cyprian,  the  pseudo  Clement  (Recogni- 
tiones),  Lactantius,  Victorinus,  Athanasius,  Hilary 
of  Poictiers,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  Ambrose, 
Jerome,  Rufinus,  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Cyril 
of  Alexandria,  Leo  the  Great,  Cassian,  Fulgentius, 
Cassiodorus,  and  Gregory  the  Great ;  in  philosophy, 
Aristotle,  Plato,  and  Porphyry  (at  second  hand  after 
Boethius) ;  in  science,  Aratus,  Hyginus,  Solinus, 
Pliny,   etc.  ;    in  antiquities,  Varro  and  Macrobius  ; 


ISIDORE  OF  SEVILLE  AND  JOHN  OF  BICLARO  229 

in  grammar  and  rhetoric,  Cicero,  Ouintilian, 
Priscian,  Donatus,  Servius,  Victorinus,  Velius 
Longus,  Charisius,  etc. ;  in  oratory,  Demosthenes 
(the  Olynthiacs)  and  Cicero  ;  in  law.  Gains,  Ulpian, 
Paul,  the  Theodosian  Code,  etc.  ;  in  medicine, 
Caelius  Aurelianus ;  in  history,  Sallust,  Livy, 
Suetonius,  Justin,  Julius  Africanus,  Hegesippus, 
Eusebius,  Orosius,  etc.  ;  in  poetry,  Atta,  Cinna, 
Dracontius,  Horace,  Juvenal,  Juvencus,  Lucan, 
Lucretius,  Martial,  Naevius  (under  the  name  of 
Ennius),  Ovid,  Persius,  Plautus,  Pomponius,  Proba 
Falconia,  Terence,  and  Virgil ;  in  architecture, 
Vitruvius,  etc.  These  are  samples  only.  What 
will  be  noted  is  the  paucity  of  the  references  to 
Greek  books. ^ 

In  addition  to  the  remarkable  family  just  named, 
I  ought  to  mention  another  Spanish  scholar  and 
theologian  who  was  famous  at  this  time,  namely, 
John,  Abbot  of  Biclaro,  and  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Gerona.  He  was  a  champion  of  orthodoxy,  and 
wrote    a    chronicle    dealinor    with    the    reio-ns    of 

o  o 

Leovigild  and  Reccared,  Kings  of  the  Visigoths. 
He  was  born  in  540,  went  to  Constantinople  in 
558,  where  he  stayed  till  578,  and  then  returned 
to  Spain.  His  chronicle  is  a  work  of  the  first 
authority  for  the  conversion  of  the  Spanish  Arians 
and  for  the  history  of  the  Council  of  Toledo,  at  which 
he  was  present.  I  have  enlarged  somewhat  on  the 
history  of  Spain  at  this  time,  because  it  was  in 
marked  contrast  with   that  of    Italy  and   France, 

*  Dom.  H.  Leclercq,  VEspagne  Chrdtienne,  2nd  ed.  324  and  325, 


2  30    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

which  were  both  sinking  lower  and  lower  in  culture 
and  in  character.  It  was  in  fact  with  Ireland,  the 
brightest  home  of  Christianity  in  Western  Europe. 

Let  us  now  return  aorain  to  Britain. 

King  y^thelberht's  death  caused  a  great  vacancy. 
To  use  Thomas  Fuller's  quaint  words,  "  it  appeared 
as  if  much  of  Christianity  was  buried  in  his  grave." 
Not  Christianity  only,  for  with  his  death  "  the  hege- 
mony" over  the  English  race  held  by  Kent  passed 
elsewhere,  namely,  to  East  Anglia.  It  is,  in  fact, 
very  probable  that  it  had  done  so  at  his  baptism, 
for  we  may  believe  that  that  act  of  submission  to 
the  foreign  faith  and  the  foreign  priests  would  be 
mightily  distasteful  to  the  rough  and  sturdy  pagans 
who  dominated  the  rest  of  the  land. 

"On  the  death  of  y^thelberht,"  says  Bede,  "when 
his  son  Eadbald  had  assumed  the  helm  of  govern- 
ment, it  proved  a  great  disaster  to  the  still  tender 
growth  of  the  Church  there.  Eadbald  not  only 
refused  to  accept  the  faith  of  Christ,^  but  polluted 
himself  with  such  wickedness  as  was  not  so  much  as 
named  among  the  Gentiles,  and  married  his  father's 
widow."  ^  In  this  latter  offence  against  Church  law, 
Eadbald  was  following  an  old  custom  of  his  race,  and 
it  is  quite  probable  that  Bercta  was  then  an  elderly 
woman.  His  example  in  abandoning  Christianity 
was  followed  (probably  gladly)  by  many  of  his 
subjects.     Bede  tells  us  the  apostate  King  became 

^  Bede's  words  are  recipere  noluerat^  which,  as  Mr.  Phimmer 
says,  imply  that  he  remained  a  heathen  more  or  less  during  his 
father's  lifetime  (Plummer's  Bede,  ii.  p.  88). 

2  Bede,  ii.  5. 


RELAPSE  OF  ESSEX  FROM  CHRISTIANITY   231 

the  victim  of  an  often-recurring  insanity,  and  that  he 
also  suffered  from  the  attacks  of  an  unclean  spirit — 
a  statement  we  must  of  course  take  with  many  grains 
of  salt.  It  was  a  very  usual  way  of  creating  terror 
in  the  minds  of  their  people  for  priests  to  ascribe  the 
misfortuaes  of  their  enemies  to  the  wickedness  or 
madness  of  the  princes  whom  they  disliked. 

The  same  movement  took  place  in  Essex,  only 
in  a  more  aggressive  form.  There  the  Christian 
King  Saberct,  who  died  about  the  same  time  as  his 
uncle,  yEthelberht,  left  as  his  heirs  three  sons,  who 
had  meanwhile  remained  heathens,  and  who  also 
began  to  cultivate  once  more  the  idols  which  they 
had  professedly  abandoned.  Bede  tells  a  story 
which  shows  that  at  that  time  the  unbaptized  were 
sometimes  allowed  to  be  present  at  the  sacrament. 
He  says  that  when  they  saw  their  bishop  (i.e.  the 
Bishop  of  London)  giving  the  Eucharist  to  the 
people,  they  asked  why  they  also  should  not  have 
some  of  the  fine  bread  which  he  used  to  give  to  their 
father  "Saba,"  as  they  were  wont  to  call  him,  and 
which  they  still  distributed  in  church.  He  replied 
that  if,  like  their  father,  they  would  consent  to  be 
baptized  they  should  also  partake  of  the  bread, 
but  if  they  continued  to  despise  the  Giver  of  life 
they  could  not  possibly  receive  the  bread  of  life. 
They  refused  to  go  to  the  font,  the  need  for  which 
they  said  they  did  not  feel,  but  they  declared  they 
would  insist  upon  eating  the  bread  notwithstanding, 
and  as  the  bishop  {i.e.  Mellitus)  still  resisted  them, 
they  bade  him  leave  their  province  ;  he  and  his, 


232     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

and  in  fact  turned  him  out.  The  story  points  to 
the  ancient  discipline  forbidding  the  presence  of  the 
unbaptized  at  the  Eucharist. 

When  Bishop  MelHtus  left  London,  he  repaired 
to  Kent  to  take  counsel  with  his  brother  bishops 
there,  Laurence  and  Justus,  and  they  all  three 
decided  it  was  better  worth  while  [satius)  de- 
finitely to  leave  a  country  where  they  had  been  so 
ill  used  and  to  return  to  their  native  land  [i.e.  to 
Italy).  Bishop  Browne  quotes  this  fact  as  a  proof 
that  their  mission  had  been  really  a  failure. 
Mellitus  and  Justus  were  the  first  to  set  out,  and 
withdrew  to  Gaul  to  await  events.  "The  Kings  who 
had  driven  from  them  the  heralds  of  the  faith" 
(i.e.  the  Kings  of  Essex),  says  Bede,  "  did  not  practise 
the  worship  of  devils  very  long.  They  went  out  to 
fight  against  the  Gewissians  {i.e.  the  West  Saxons), 
and  fell,  together  with  their  army,  but  their  people 
still  remained  obdurate  in  their  idolatry."  From 
the  years  6i6  to  654  the  East  Saxons  continued  to 
repudiate  Christianity.  It  was  doubtless  largely 
this  attitude  which  prevented  Gregory's  original 
plan  of  making  London  the  ecclesiastical  capital  of 
England  from  being  carried  out. 

Laurence  was  on  the  point  of  setting  out  to  join 
Mellitus  and  Justus.  We  are  told  he  ordered  his 
bed  to  be  made  that  very  night  in  the  Church  of 
the  Monastery  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul.  After 
uttering  many  prayers  and  shedding  many  tears 
he  lay  down  and  went  to  sleep,  but  St.  Peter 
appeared  to  him  in  the  middle  of  the  night,  and 


ST.  PETER'S  CASTIGATION  OF  LAURENCE   233 

proceeded  to  scourge  him  and  to  demand  why  he 
was  thus  forsaking  his  flock  in  the  midst  of  wolves, 
and  reminded  him  how  he  himself  had  suffered 
bonds,  blows,  imprisonments,  and  death  itself, 
for  the  sake  of  Christ's  little  ones.  Laurence 
thereupon,  as  soon  as  it  was  daylight,  rose  up  and 
went  to  the  King,  and  drawing  aside  his  garment 
showed  him  the  result  of  the  castigation  he  had 
received.  Eadbald  was  much  surprised,  and  asked 
who  had  ventured  to  inflict  these  stripes  on  such  a 
man  ;  and  when  he  heard  that  it  was  for  the  King's 
own  salvation  he  had  endured  the  blows  at  the  hands 
of  the  Apostle,  he  was  greatly  alarmed,  denounced 
his  own  worship  of  idols  and  unlawful  marriage,  was 
duly  baptized,  and  proceeded  to  favour  the  interests 
of  the  Church  in  every  way  he  could. ^ 

The  story  about  the  scourging  of  Laurence  by 
St.  Peter  is  referred  to  by  Alcuin  in  his  letter  of 
remonstrance  to  Bishop  ^thelheard  :  '' oliin  sanc- 
Hssiinus  ejusdeni  sedis  pontifex  Laureniius  velle 
legitur ;  qid  tamen  apostolica  aiLctoritate  castigatus, 
ab  incepto  resipiiit  consilio.''^  It  also  engrosses  two 
lines  in  Laurence's  epitaph,  as  given  by  Thomas  of 
Elmham  : — 

"  Hie  sacra,  Laurenti,  sunt  signa  tui  monumenti 
Tu  quoque  jucundus  pater,  antistesque  secundus 
Pro  populo  Christi  scapulas  dorsumque  dedisti 
Artubus  hinc  laceris  multa  vibice  mederis."^ 

Dr.  Hook*  and  Mr.  J.  R.  Green^  explain  the  story 

'  Bede,  ii.  6. 

2  Mo7t.  Ale.  367  ;  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  519. 

3  Elmham,  149.  *  i.  89.  *  Making  of  England,  247. 


2  34    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

as  having  arisen  from  a  dream,  but  a  dream  would 
not  have  left  marks  of  scourging  on  the  bishop's 
back.  Churton^  suggests  that  the  stripes  were 
self-inflicted  in  compunction,  by  the  archbishop ; 
but  this  does  not  explain  the  positive  statement 
made  to  the  King.  We  are  safer  in  attributing 
the  event  to  a  pious  fraud  meant  to  frighten  the 
ruler  into  penitence,  which  is  the  view  adopted  by 
Haddan^and  Hardwick.^  Similar  stories  were  told 
of  St.  Jerome,  Bishop  Natalius,  and  St.  Columba.* 
One  thing  is  very  plain,  the  attitude  adopted  by 
the  three  bishops  was  not  an  heroic  one. 

King  Eadbald  on  his  conversion  recalled  Bishops 
Mellitus  and  Justus  from  Gaul,  and  they  came  back 
a  year  after  their  self-imposed  exile.  It  would 
be  interesting  to  know  where  they  had  meanwhile 
been.  Justus  returned  to  Rochester,  but  the  people 
of  London  refused  to  receive  Mellitus,  preferring 
to  remain  pagans.  It  is  clear  that  Eadbald  did  not 
possess  the  same  authority  there  as  yEthelberht  had 
done,  and  Mellitus  probably  took  up  his  residence 
at  Canterbury.  Eadbald's  conversion  was  complete, 
and  he  worked  to  strengthen  the  faith.^  He  built 
a  church  dedicated  to  the  Holy  Mother  of  God 
{sanctae  Dei  genetricis),  in  the  precincts  of  the 
Abbey  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  {i.e.  St.  Augustine's), 
which  was  afterwards  consecrated  by  Archbishop 
Mellitus. 

This    church   we    have    already   referred    to   in 

^  Early  Etig.  Church,  53  and  54. 

^  Rejnams,  309.  ^  Chr.  Ch.  Mid.  Ages,  p.  9. 

♦  See  Bright,  op.  cit.  118.  ^  Bede,  ii.  6. 


EADBALD'S  GRANTS  TO  THE  CHURCH     235 

reporting  the  rebuilding  of  St.  Augustine's  Abbey 
Church,  and  the  translation  of  the  relics  of  St. 
Augustine.  It  was  largely  pulled  down  in  order 
to  make  room  for  the  presbytery  of  the  new 
building.  According  to  Thorne,  a  part  of  it  was 
incorporated  in  the  latter  as  the  "  Church  in  the 
Crypts." 

A  second  church,  which  was  dedicated  to  St. 
Peter,  is  said  to  have  been  built  by  Eadbald  at 
Folkestone.^ 

Two  spurious  deeds  are  extant  professing  to 
convey  lands  from  Eadbald  to  the  Church.  One 
of  them,  preserved  by  Thomas  of  Elmham,^  pro- 
fesses to  convey  thirty  plough  lands  at  "Nortburne" 
to  the  Abbey  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and  to  be 
witnessed  by  Archbishop  Laurence,  Bishops  Mellitus 
and  Justus,  by  the  King's  wife  {copjila)  Aenima  \sic\ 
daughter  of  the  King  of  the  Franks,  and  by  the 
King's  sons  Egberht  (who,  in  the  body  of  the  deed, 
is  called  Egfrid)  and  Ercumberht,  etc.  The  second 
deed,  preserved  at  Lambeth,  professes  to  convey  a 
property  called  Adesham  to  Christ  Church  Cathedral. 
It  is  unattested.  The  latter  is  dated  in  616,  the 
former  in  618.^  Nothing  in  these  deeds  is  genuine 
except  "the  parcels,"  which  no  doubt  describe  pro- 
perty in  possession  of  the  abbey  at  a  later  time. 

Archbishop  Laurence,  who  is  styled  dilechts 
archiepiscopus  by  the  Pope,'*  died  on  the  2nd  of 
February   619,  and  was   buried  on  the   same  day 

^  "  Vit.  Sanct.  Eanswithaa,"  Hardy,  Catalogue,  i.  228  and  229. 
-  Op.  cit.  144-146.  "  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  69  and  70. 

*  Bede,  ii.  ch.  4. 


2  36    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

beside  his  predecessor  Augustine  in  the  Church 
of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul.^  From  Bede  ii.  7  it 
would  seem  that  he  added  to  the  churches  at 
Canterbury  a  '"'■  martyr itim',^  i.e.  a  church  or  shrine 
dedicated  to  martyrs,  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Cathedral,  in  honour  of  the  Four  Crowned  Brothers 
{Quatuor  Coronati),  i.e.  Severus,  Severianus,  Victor- 
inus,  and  Carpophorus,  who  were  martyred  in  the 
reign  of  Diocletian.  A  well-known  church  dedicated 
to  them  existed  near  the  Caelian  Hill  in  the  time  of 
Gregory  the  First,  and  was  rebuilt  in  626  by  Pope 
Honorius.^  It  is  still  one  of  the  most  curious  and 
interesting  churches  in  Rome. 

St.  Laurence  was  buried  where  so  many  other 
archbishops  were  to  be  afterwards  laid,  and  was 
deemed  a  saint.  His  relics  were  preserved  in  a 
casket,  and  placed  in  the  eastern  apse  of  the  same 
church  after  it  was  rebuilt,  and  on  the  left  of  those  of 
St.  Augustine,  as  appears  from  the  plan  in  Dugdale, 
already  mentioned.  A  number  of  miracles  of  the 
usually  otiose  character  are  reported  by  Gocelin 
and  in  Capgrave's  Nova  Legenda  ^  of  St.  Laurence 
both  before  and  after  his  death. 

Before  turning  to  his  successor,  let  us  in  a 
few  words  record  the  scanty  doings  of  the  Popes  at 
this  time.  We  have  seen  how  Boniface  the  Fourth 
converted  the  Pantheon  into  a  Christian  church. 
This  is  the  one  notable  fact  recorded  of  him.     It 

^  Bede,  ii.  7.  2  Bede,  ii.  7  ;  Bright,  ^/.  «/.  124  and  note  i. 

^  Thomas  of  Elmham  attributes  to  him  the  appointment  of  two 
Abbots  of  St.  Augustine's,  namely,  John  and  Rufinianus,  op.  cit.  12 
and  148. 


BONIFACE  THE  FOURTH  AND  DEUSDEDIT  237 

is  well  to  remember  that  we  are  expressly  told  he 
had  to  ask  the  Emperor  for  a  gift  of  the  Pantheon 
before  he  reconsecrated  it,  showing  that  the  latter 
and  not  the  Pope  was  still  the  actual  owner  of  the 
old  State  property  at  Rome.  Boniface  died  on  the 
7th  of  May  615,^  and  on  his  tomb  the  fact  just 
mentioned  is  made  his  chief  title  to  fame.  It  reads 
thus  : — 

"Gregorio  quartus,  jacet  hie  Bonifacius  almus. 
Hujus  qui  sedis  fuit  aequus  rector  et  aedis 
Tempore,  qui  Focae  cernens  templum  fore  Romae. 
Delubra  cunctorum  fuerunt  quae  Daemoniorum 
Hoc  expurgavit,  Sanctis  cunctisque  dicavit."^ 

The  inscription  is  still  preserved  in  the  vaults  of 
the  Vatican. 

The  Liber  Pontificalis  adds  that  "  he  converted 
his  house  into  a  monastery,"  showing  that  his  heart, 
like  that  of  St.  Gregory,  was  with  the  monks.  The 
same  authority  says  that  in  his  time  Rome  was 
afflicted  with  famine,  pestilence,  and  inundations. 

He  was  succeeded  six  months  later  by  Deus- 
dedit,  son  of  Stephen,  a  subdeacon  and  a  Roman. 
The  long  interval  which  at  this  time  separated  the 
death  of  a  Pope  from  the  accession  of  his  successor 
was  due  no  doubt  to  the  necessity  of  securing  the 
Emperor's  imprimatur.  The  Liber  Pontificalis  says 
of  him  that  he  greatly  cherished  the  clergy,  and 
restored  the  priests  (sacerdotes)  and  clerks  to  their 
former  position,  which  has  been  interpreted  as 
meaning  that  he  reversed   the  policy  of   Boniface 

1  Gregorovius  I.  425.  »  lb.  436,  note  15, 


238    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

the  Fourth,  who  had  favoured  the  monks  at  the 
expense  of  the  secular  clergy. 

A  similar  phrase,  ''Hie  ecclesia  de  clej'O  ijnplevitj' 
is  used  in  the  same  work  of  Sabinianus.  Deusdedit 
died  on  the  8th  of  November  6i8,^  probably  of  the 
plague  {clades  in  popido  percussio  scabeartmi).  In 
his  time  Eleutherius  had  been  appointed  Exarch  of 
Ravenna  in  the  place  of  John,  who  had  been 
murdered.  He  visited  Rome,  was  received  in  state 
by  the  Pope,  and  then  went  on  to  Naples,  where  he 
put  down  a  rebellion,  and  then  returned  to  Ravenna, 
while  great  peace  reigned  in  Italy.^  Deusdedit 
was  succeeded  by  another  Neapolitan,  Boniface  the 
Fifth,  who  was  not  consecrated  till  December  619.^ 
It  was  about  this  time  that  the  Emperors  trans- 
ferred to  the  Exarchs  of  Ravenna  the  rieht  of 
confirming  the  appointment  of  the  Bishops  of 
Rome.*  According  to  the  Jesuit  Garnerio,  the 
editor  of  the  Liber  Diu7'fms,  the  second  form  of 
the  decree,  styled  Decretum  de  electione  pontificis, 
was  first  used  at  the  election  of  Boniface  the  Fifth. 
The  electing  body  is  described  in  the  words  Cler^is, 
optimates,  et  milites  seu  civesJ* 

In  the  Liber  Pontificalis  we  are  told  that 
Boniface  provided  that  wills  were  to  be  interpreted 
{i.e.  doubtless  by  the  Ecclesiastical  courts)  in 
accordance  with  the  Imperial  Code,  that  no  one 
should  be  dragged  [trakatur)  from  a   church   [i.e. 

^  Lib.  Pont.,  sub  voce  "  Deusdedit"  ;  Gregorovius  I.  426. 

*  Liber  Pontificalis,  chap.  Ixx. 

*  lb. ;  and  Plummer,  Bede.,  ii.  90,  note. 

*  Gregorovius  I.  427.  *  Jb.  p.  436,  note  21. 


POPE  BONIFACE  THE  FIFTH  239 

one  who  had  sought  asylum  there),  that  acolytes 
were  not  to  presume  to  move  the  relics  of  saints 
(this  was  to  be  done  by  priests  alone),  and  that  in 
the  Lateran  Baptistery,  acolytes  were  not  to  take 
the  place  of  subdeacons  as  assistants  to  the  deacon 
in  baptisms.  Boniface  completed  the  cemetery 
of  St.  Nicomedes  and  consecrated  it.  The  same 
work  speaks  of  the  gentleness  of  Boniface  towards 
everybody,  and  that  he  was  devoted  to  the  clergy 
[clerzis),  i.e.  he  probably  cherished  them  rather  than 
the  monks.  During  his  Papacy,  Eleutherius  the 
Exarch  attempted  to  displace  the  Emperor  and  to 
mount  the  throne.  He  went  to  Rome  and  was 
there  killed  by  the  soldiery  from  Ravenna  at  the 
castle  of  Luciolis,  and  his  head  was  sent  to  Con- 
stantinople. On  his  death  on  the  25th  October 
625,  Boniface  was  buried  at  St.  Peter's.^  His 
epitaph  is  given  by  De  Rossi.^  He  was  succeeded 
by  Honorius. 

^  Liber  Pontificalis^  Boniface  v.  2  inscript.  Christ,  ii.  128. 


CHAPTER   V 

St.   Mellitus 

On  the  death  of  St.  Laurence  he  was  followed 
as  archbishop  by  Mellitus,  who,  as  we  have  seen, 
had  been  Bishop  of  London,  but  who  was  now 
without  a  see.  It  is  noteworthy  that  Bede  dis- 
tinctly calls  Mellitus  archbishop.^  Justus  still  con- 
tinued Bishop  of  Rochester.  Bede  tells  us  that 
during  their  occupation  of  the  two  Kentish  sees 
they  received  a  letter  of  exhortation  from  Pope 
Boniface.  Mr.  Plummer  has  very  plausibly  sug- 
gested that  this  letter,  or  a  portion  of  it,  is  extant 
but  not  intact,  and  that  it  has  in  fact  been  joined 
on  to  another  letter  written  later  to  Justus,  by  a 
scribe  who  turned  over  two  leaves  of  a  MS.  This 
is  supported  by  the  fact  that  while  in  the  earlier 
part  we  have  the  plural  pronouns  vos  and  vester, 
in  the  latter  we  have  the  singular  ones  tzi  and  izms, 
and  that  the  earlier  part  of  the  letter  was  meant  to 
include  Mellitus.  I  think  this  view  is  very  pro- 
bable. The  part  of  the  letter  which  Mr.  Plummer 
thinks  formed  part  of  the  exhortation  of  Boniface 
is  largely  rhetorical,  congratulating  the  bishops  in 

^  ii.  6  and  7. 
240 


ARCHBISHOP  MELLITUS  241 

their  zeal,  and  encouraging  them.  He  mentions  in 
it,  however,  that  he  had  received  a  letter  from  King 
Adulwald^  [i.e.  Eadbald),  in  which  the  King  had 
praised  their  efforts,  and  he  bids  them  work  for  the 
conversion  not  only  of  the  people  subject  to  him 
but  also  of  the  neighbouring  tribes.^ 

Bede  tells  us  that,  although  he  suffered  from 
the  gout,  the  steps  of  his  mind  were  sound  [Erat 
autein  Mellittis  .  .  .  podagra  gravatus  sed  mentis 
gressibiis  sanis).  He  reports  a  story  of  him,  namely, 
that  "  the  city  of  Canterbury  having  on  one  occasion 
been  set  on  fire,  and  being  in  danger  of  destruction, 
no  amount  of  water  seeming  to  quench  the  flames, 
which  extended  to  the  Bishop's  residence.  Trust- 
ing in  the  help  of  God,  he  had  himself  carried  to 
meet  them  as  they  assailed  with  special  vigour  the 
Chapel  of  the  Four  Crowned  Ones  already  named. 
Then  by  prayer  the  bishop  began  to  drive  back 
the  danger  which  the  hands  of  the  whole  and 
strong  had  not  been  able  to  cope  with.  Presently 
the  wind,  which  had  blown  the  fire  over  the  city, 
changed  its  course  and  blew  southwards,  and 
eventually  lulled  and  became  quite  calm."^ 

During  his  tenure  of  the  see  Mellitus  consecrated 
a  chapel  dedicated  to  "the  Holy  Mother  of  God," 
which  had  been  built  by  King  Eadbald  within  the 
precincts  of  the   Monastery  of  St.   Peter  and   St. 

^  This  name  is,  in  fact,  a  different  one  entirely  to  Eadbald, 
although  doubtless  meant  for  the  latter.  The  mistake  perhaps 
arose  from  the  fact  that  the  King  of  the  Lombards  at  this  time 
was  called  Adulwald  or  Ethelwald. 

2  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  72  and  72>-  ^  Bede,  ii.  7. 

16 


242     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

PauP  {vide  supra,  p.  234).  Bede  tells  us  Mellitus 
died  on  the  24th  of  April  624.  He  speaks  of  him 
as  naturally  of  noble  birth,  but  nobler  by  the  lofti- 
ness of  his  soul.  Gocelin  in  his  life  of  him  describes 
certain  miracles  as  performed  at  his  tomb  which  are 
specially  connected  with  the  cure  of  the  gout  from 
which  he  suffered  so  much.  When  the  relics  in  the 
old  church  were  translated  in  1087,  the  bones  of 
St.  Mellitus  were  placed  on  the  right  of  those  of 
St.  Augustine  in  the  apse  of  the  new  church.  It 
does  not  appear  that  Mellitus  ever  received  the  pall, 
which  was  apparently  also  the  case  with  Laurentius, 
and  it  is  equally  remarkable  that  neither  of  them 
ordained  any  bishops,  which  that  fact  may  explain. 
When  Mellitus  died,  only  one  Roman  bishop  in  fact 
remained  in  Britain,  namely,  Justus.  The  epitaph 
of  Mellitus  is  given  by  Thomas  of  Elmham  as 
follows : — 

"  Summus  pontificum,  flos  tertius,  et  mel  apricum 
Hac  titulis  clara  redoles,  Mellite,  sub  ara, 
Laudibus  aeternis  te  praedicat  urbs  Dorobernis 
Cui  semel  ardenti  restas  virtute  potenti." 

St.  Justus 

On  the  death  of  Mellitus,  Justus  succeeded  him 
as  archbishop.  This  was  some  time  after  April 
624.  Bede  tells  us  he  received  a  letter  from 
Pope  Boniface  authorising  him  to  consecrate 
bishops,  which  is  addressed  Dilectissinio  fratri 
Jtisto^     As   Mr.    Plummer  has  suggested,    Bede's 

1  Bede,  ii.  6.  "^  Ib.\\.  8. 


LETTER  OF  POPE  BONIFACE  TO  JUSTUS     243 

transcript  of  the  letter  is  mixed  up  with  that  of 
another  one,  above  recited.  The  latter  part  of  the 
document,  as  he  gives  it,  alone  relates  to  Justus  as 
archbishop.  He  writes  to  say  that  the  bearer  of 
the  presents  also  took  with  him  a  pall  which  he 
authorised  him  to  use  at  the  celebration  of  the 
Holy  Mysteries,  and  then  only,  and  also  giving 
him  authority  to  ordain  bishops  when  need  required, 
so  that  Christ's  Gospel,  having  many  preachers, 
might  be  spread  abroad  among  all  the  nations 
which  were  as  yet  unconverted  ;  and  he  bade  him 
keep  with  uncorrupt  sincerity  of  mind  what  the  Holy 
See  had  conferred  on  him,  and  to  remember  what 
was  symbolised  by  what  he  wore  on  his  shoulders 
[tain  praecipMum  indumentum  humeris  tuis  baiu- 
landmn  susceperis)} 

An  edition  of  this  letter  given  by  William  oi 
Malmesbury  is  a  sophistication,  and  forms  one  of  a 
series  of  forgeries  reported  by  him  which  were  con- 
cocted to  sustain  the  claims  of  the  See  of  Canterbury 
in  its  famous  controversy  with  that  of  York.^ 

Having  received  this  letter,  Justus  proceeded 
to  consecrate  (alone,  be  it  noted)  a  new  bishop  to 
the  See  of  Rochester  which  he  had  himself  vacated.^ 
This  was  Romanus,  doubtless  one  of  the  contingent 

1  Bede,  ii.  8. 

2  See  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  73-75  ;  Plummer,  Bcde^  vol.  ii.  91 
and  92. 

^  Dr.  Bright  points  out  the  close  dependence  of  the  See  of 
Rochester  on  Canterbury,  the  successors  of  Justus  being  especially 
expected  to  do  work  for  the  successors  of  Augustine  {pp.  cit.  102). 
Until  the  year  1148  the  bishops  of  Rochester  were  appointed  by  the 
Archbishop.  The  Bishop  of  Rochester  is  the  cross-bearer  of  the 
Province  {pp.  cit.  102  and  note  i). 


244    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

of  recruits  to  the  mission,  who  had  accompanied 
him  from  Rome.  He  was  afterwards  sent  by  Justus 
on  a  mission  to  Pope  Honorius/  The  latter  had  suc- 
ceeded Boniface  the  Fifth  at  the  end  of  the  year  625.^ 
We  do  not  know  what  the  object  of  this  mission  was. 
Bede  tells  us  Romanus  was  drowned  while  on  the 
way,  "in  the  Italian  Sea,"  showing  that  he  must 
have  travelled  by  water  across  the  Gulf  of  Genoa. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  another  part  of  England. 

"  East  Anglia  at  this  time  included  the  modern 
counties  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  together  with  at 
least  that  part  of  Cambridgeshire  which  lies  to  the 
east  of  the  Great  Dyke  (the  Devil's  Dyke)  at  New- 
market. The  parishes  in  this  corner  of  Cambridge- 
shire were  in  the  East  Anglian  diocese  till  fifty  or 
sixty  years  ago,  when  the  Archdeaconry  of  Sudbury 
was  transferred  to  the  See  of  Ely.  .  .  .  The  fen 
country  up  to  Peterborough,  although  probably 
reckoned  with  East  Anglia  at  some  period  of  time, 
formed  a  principality  of  Fen-men  (Gyrvas),  which 
would  count  with  Mercia  or  with  East  Anglia 
according  to  the  political  circumstances  of  the 
time."^  Bede  says  that  Ely  was  in  East  Anglia,* 
and,  as  Dr.  Brown  says,  inasmuch  as  Medehamstead 
(now  Peterborough)  was  in  the  land  of  the  Gyrvii,^ 
it  is  very  probable  that  Grantachester  or  Cambridge 
was  so  also. 

It    was    in     this    secluded    district,    which    was 

*  Bede,  ii.  20. 

*  Ltd.  Pont.,  sub  nom.  "  Honorius  "  ;  Gregorovius  I.  426. 
^  Bishop  Browne,  Conv.  of  the  Heptarchy,  68-69. 

*  iv.  17.  «  lb.  iv.  6. 


REDWALD  OF  EAST  ANGLIA  245 

almost   an    island    (for    the    marshes    separated    it 
from  the  rest   of   England),  that  a  special  swarm 
of    Anglian    invaders    had    settled.       They    were 
known   to   their   neighbours  as    East  Anglians,  in 
contrast  with  those  of  the  race  who  lived  west  of 
the  Marshes.     Thomas  of  Elmham  describes  them 
as  the  most  strenuous  of  the  German  race,  and  says 
they  were  named  Stout-heris  {i.e.  bold  lords)  by  their 
neighbours.     He  says  that  "according  to  a  saying 
they  were  wont  to  put  their  children  of  tender  age 
on    the    roofs    of   their   houses    so   as    to    test  the 
quality  of  their  nerve  and  agility."^     They  had  a 
native  race  of  kings  whose  family  stock  was  known 
as  that  of  the  Uffings,  with  a  reputed  ancestor  called 
Uffa,  who  is  called  Wuffa  by  Nennius.     The  latter 
calls  him  the  son  of  Guecha  or  Vecta,  "  who  was  the 
first  who  reigned  in  Britain  over  the  East  Angles." 
He  makes  him  the  father  of  Tidil,  and  Tidil  the 
father   of  Eeni.'^     Bede    says    that  Vuffa  was    the 
ancestor   of  the   Vuffings,  whose   son    was    Tytil, 
whose  son  was  Redwald.^     Redwald  is  not  men- 
tioned by  Nennius.     Florence  of  Worcester,  in  his 
genealogy   of  the    East    Anglian    kings,    conflates 
the  two  stories,  and  says  that  Eeni  and  Redwald 
were    brothers.      Bede  makes  Redwald  the  fourth 
Bretwalda,  and  adds  that  he  began  to  secure  the 
hegemony  for  his  people  even  during  the  reign  of 
^thelberht  [Reduald  qui  etiani  vivente  /^dilbei'cto 
eidem  suae genti  ducatum  praebebat,  obtinuit).'^    Flor- 

»  Op.  cit.  140.  2  M.H.B.  p.  74. 

*  Lib.  ii.  ch.  xv.  *  lb.  ii.  5. 


246    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

ence  of  Worcester  states  (doubtless  it  was  an  infer- 
ence) that  he  became  master  of  all  the  Anglians 
and  Saxons  south  of  the  Humbert  His  capital  has 
been  located  in  more  than  one  place.  Bishop  Browne 
suggests  that  it  was  probably  at  Rendlesham  in 
Suffolk,  a  little  to  the  south-east  of  Woodbridge. 
Exning,  near  Newmarket,  is  also  mentioned  some- 
what later  as  a  royal  seat,  while  Framlingham  is 
named  as  an  East  Anglian  royal  vill.  Bede  tells 
us  that,  having  paid  a  visit  to  Kent  in  the  time 
of  yEthelberht,  Redwald  was  initiated  into  the 
Christian  sacraments  {sacramentis  Christianae  fidei 
inbnhis  est),  but  in  vain,  since  on  his  return  home 
he  was  seduced  from  the  faith  by  his  wife  and 
certain  perverse  "doctors"  {^perversis  doctoribus), 
thus  becoming  worse  than  before — for,  after  the 
manner  of  the  ancient  Samaritans,  he  combined 
the  worship  of  Christ  with  that  of  the  gods  whom 
he  previously  worshipped,  and  in  the  same  shrine 
and  altar  {in  eodem  fano  et  altare)  at  which  he 
offered  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  he  had  a  small  altar 
(aruld)  where  he  offered  victims  to  the  demons. 
Bede  says  that  Aldwulf,  who  reigned  over  the  pro- 
vince in  his  time,  asserted  that  this  shrine  was  still 
existing  in  his  youth,  and  that  he  had  seen  it.^ 

There  seems  reason  to  believe  that  Paulinus  may 
have  orone  to  East  Ang^Ha  when  Redwald  returned 
there  after  his  visit  to  ^thelberht,  and  that  he  may 
have  done  some  missionary  work  there.^  This 
would  explain  Bede's  silence  about  the  doings  of  a 

1  M.H.B,  636.  2  ^e^g^  ii   15,  8  Yi^  infya. 


EARLY  LIFE  OF  .EDWLN  OF  NORTHUMBRIA    247 

man  so  famous  to  the  Northumbrians,  in  the  days 
before  he  undertook  his  northern  mission.  Paulinus 
may  have  met  King  ^dwin  about  this  time.  The 
latter,  as  we  shall  see  presently,  had  been  driven 
out  of  his  kingdom  of  Deira  by  his  brother-in-law, 
^thelfrid,  the  King  of  Bernicia,  and  had  taken 
shelter  with  Redwald.  Moved  by  the  gifts  and  threats 
of  T^thelfrid,  Redwald  determined  to  assassinate  his 
guest,  but  was  turned  away  from  that  purpose  by 
his  Queen,  who  urged  upon  him  that  nothing  would 
be  baser  than  to  sell  his  plighted  promise  to  his 
young  guest  for  money.  He  consequently  not  only 
sent  back  ^thelfrid's  messengers,  but  collected  his 
own  forces  and  marched  against  the  latter,  and 
fought  a  great  fight  against  him  on  the  borders  of 
the  Mercians  on  the  eastern  bank  of  the  river  Idle 
{amnis  qui  vacatur  Idlae).  This  was  probably  at 
Idleton,  near  Retford.^  In  the  fight  y^thelfrid  was 
defeated  and  killed.  "As  we  infer,"  says  Bright, 
"from  a  calculation  of  Bede,  this  was  before  the 
I  ith  April  617."  ^  In  this  battle  we  are  told  by  the 
latter  that  Redwald's  son  Raegenhere  was  killed. 
This  is  the  last  mention  we  have  of  Redwald.  It 
was  perhaps  the  great  victory  on  the  Idle  which 
secured  for  East  Anglia  the  hegemony  of  England. 
In  regard  to  Redwald's  double  cult  of  the  new 
Christian  faith  and  that  of  his  old  gods,  Bright 
quotes  some  other  apt  examples  from  other  places, 
e.g.  the  ruler  of  Pomerania,  who  set  up  a  pagan 
altar    within   a   church ;    Hakon,    son    of    Harold 

^  Pearson,  Hist.  Eng.  i.  127.  -  See  Bede,  ii.  12  ;  Bright,  123. 


248    THE  ExND  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Fairhair  of  Norway,  who,  while  signing  the  cross 
over  his  cup,  told  his  people  that  it  meant  the 
hammer  of  Thor,  etc/  On  the  death  of  Redwald, 
the  date  of  which  we  do  not  know,  he  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  son  Eorpwald. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  Angles  of  Northumbria. 
It  would  seem  that  at  the  beginning  of  their  history 
the  whole  maritime  district  from  the  Humber  to  the 
Lammermuirs  was  occupied  by  one  race,  speaking 
the  same  dialect  and  having  the  same  religion  and 
customs.  This  race  was  sharply  divided  by  its 
strongly  marked  dialect  and  vowel  sounds  from 
that  occupying  Mercia  further  south,  which  had 
probably  been  affected  by  contact  with  the  Romans 
and  Britons.  At  a  later  day  it  was  itself  divided  in 
twain  by  a  dialectic  difference  whose  origin  and 
cause  it  is  not  difficult  to  trace.  Yorkshire  was 
overrun  and  largely  settled  and  occupied  by  the 
Scandinavians.  At  the  time  when  Domesday  Book 
was  compiled,  almost  all  its  gentry  and  landowners 
were  Danes.  On  the  other  hand,  Durham,  North- 
umberland, and  the  Lothians  were  apparently  quite 
free  from  Danish  settlements,  and  there  can  be  little 
doubt  that  what  is  known  as  the  Yorkshire  dialect 
was  the  primitive  dialect  of  all  Northumbria  sophisti- 
cated and  altered  by  the  Danish  speech. 

Before  the  Danish  conquest  the  people  of 
all  Northumbria  apparently  spoke  one  language, 
which  is  preserved  in  its  greatest  purity  in 
Northumberland. 

^  Op.  cit.  1 20  and  notes. 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  NORTHUMBRIA  249 

How  this  race  came  there,  is  a  great  puzzle. 
We  are  nowhere  definitely  told,  and  it  would  seem 
probable  that  it  had  been  there  some  time  when 
the  Northumbrian  history  introduces  us  to  any 
very  definite  knowledge  about  the  district. 

In  our  earliest  notices,  Northumbria  was  divided 
into  two  sections,  separated  by  the  river  Tees  or 
perhaps  the  Tyne,  and  respectively  called  Baernicia 
and  Deira  by  the  Anglians,  and  perhaps  correspond- 
ing to  earlier  Celtic  divisions  called  Brenneich^  and 
Deivr.  The  former  stretched  from  the  Tees  or 
Tyne  to  the  Lammermuir  Hills,  and  the  latter 
(roughly  corresponding  to  Yorkshire)  lay  between 
the  Tees  and  the  H  umber. 

Bede  puts  the  foundation  of  Bernicia  in  547  ^ 
and  followino-  Nennius  he  makes  Ida,  who  is  gfiven 
a  fabulous  pedigree  by  the  latter,  its  founder.  He 
was  the  traditional  builder  of  Bamborough  Castle, 
which  became  the  capital  of  the  kingdom,  and 
was  succeeded  by  several  sons  one  after  the 
other.  One  of  these  latter,  called  y^thelric,  had 
a  son  called  yEthelfrid,  who  became  the  ruler  of 
Bernicia  in  592.  Bede  describes  him  as  "a  Saul 
in  harassing  his  enemies,"  and  adds  that  "no 
English  leader  conquered  more  British  land  either 
driving  out  the  Britons  or  reducing  them  to 
slavery."^  In  the  genealogies  attached  to  Nennius 
he  is  called  JEUret  or  Edlferd  Flesaur,  or  the 
ravager.* 

^  According  to  Rhys's  Ce/h'c  Britain,  p.  1 13,  a  form  of  Brigantia. 
2  Op.  cit.  V.  24.  3  ji,  i_  3^_  4  M.H.B.  74. 


2  50    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

In  the  year  603  he  was  attacked  by  Aidan, 
King  of  the  Scots  of  Argyll,  whom  he  defeated 
at  Dagestan,  now  called  Dawston,  at  the  head  of 
Liddesdale.^ 

Meanwhile  v^lla,  or  ^lle,  son  of  Uffa,  or  Yffi, 
had  been  reig'nincr  over  Deira.  Bede  in  the  short 
chronicle  annexed  to  his  history  says  that  ^lle 
and  y^thelfrith  were  Kings  of  Northumbria  during 
Augustine's  mission  in  Kent.^  As  we  have  seen, 
it  was  probably  some  of  the  captives  made  in  a 
war  between  ^lle  and  ^thelberht  of  Kent  who 
gave  rise  to  the  tale  about  Gregory  and  the 
Anglian  boys  above  reported. 

It  was  about  a  year  after  the  battle  of 
Dagestan,  i.e.  in  604,  the  year  in  which  Gregory 
and  Augustine  died,  that  ^lla.  King  of  Deira, 
also  died.  His  daughter  Acha  had  been  married 
to  yEthelfrid.  This  did  not  prevent  the  latter 
from  immediately  attacking  y^dwin,  the  son  and 
successor  of  yElla,  and  appropriating  his  kingdom. 
This  is  expressly  said  in  Nennius  to  have  been 
twelve  years  after  his  own  accession  to  the  throne 
of  Bernicia,  i.e.  in  604. 

As  ^dwin  was  only  forty -eight  years  old 
when  he  was  killed  in  633,  he  must  have  been 
born  in  585,  and  been  about  nineteen  years  old 
when  he  was  driven  from  the  throne.  According 
to  Bede,  his  brother-in-law  pursued  him  with  re- 
lentless  and  bitter   animosity    from    one    place    to 

^  See  Skene,  Four  Ancient  Books  of  IVa/es,  i.  177. 
2  AI.N.B.  96. 


^DWIN  OF  NORTHUMBRIA  251 

another,  through  many  kingdoms  and  countries 
and  for  many  years.^  At  length  he  sought  shelter 
among  the  Britons,  apparently  at  Chester.  The 
life  of  St.  Oswald  says  he  was  brought  up  by 
Cadvan  the  Welsh  King,  with  his  son  Cadwallon, 
and  it  was  probably  because  of  the  shelter  and 
kindness  shown  to  him  by  the  monks  of  the  great 
monastery  of  Bangor  y  Yscoed  close  by,  that 
y^thelfrid  in  613^  utterly  destroyed  that  founda- 
tion and  killed  all  its  monks.  yEdwin  escaped, 
and  seems  to  have  made  his  way  to  East  Anglia, 
whose  King,  Redwald,  was  perhaps  related  to 
him,  both  having  an  Uffa  for  an  ancestor,  who 
may  have  been  the  same  man.  Redwald  gave 
him  shelter,  ^thelfrid  was  not  long  in  pursu- 
ing him  thither,  and  sent  Redwald  much  money 
to  try  and  bribe  him  to  assassinate  his  guest,  but 
he  would  not  consent.  He  sent  a  second  and  a 
third  time,  offering  still  larger  bribes,  and  threaten- 
ing war  if  he  did  not  comply.  At  length,  either 
tempted  by  the  money  or  frightened  by  the 
menaces,  or  still  more  by  the  news  he  had  no 
doubt  heard  of  ^thelfrid's  terrible  campaign  at 
Chester  and  his  defeat  of  the  Scottish  King,  he 
promised  either  to  kill  him  or  to  hand  him 
over  to  the  envoys.  A  friend,  says  Bede,  who 
had  heard  of  Redwald's  determination,  went  into 
Edwin's  chamber  in  the  first  hour  of  the  ni^ht  and 
offered  to  conduct  him  where  neither  Redwald  nor 

^  Bedc^  ii.  12. 

-  Ann.  Camb.,  ad  an. ;  Annals  of  Uhte7%  ad  an.  ;  Lloyd,  History 
of  Wales,  i.  179,  note  68. 


252    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

^thelfrid  could  do  him  any  harm.  While  thanking 
him  for  his  kind  offices,  i^dwin  said  he  could  not 
do  this,  since  he  had  a  pact  with  the  King  by  which 
the  latter  had  undertaken  to  defend  him,  and  if 
he  was  to  die  he  would  rather  do  it  by  Redwald's 
own  hand  than  by  that  of  a  meaner  man.  Besides, 
whither  was  one  to  fly  to,  who  had  for  so  many 
years  been  a  vagabond  trying  to  escape  with  his 
life? 

On  the  departure  of  his  friend,  yEdwin  sat  on  a 
stone  in  front  of  the  palace,  cogitating  what  he  was 
to  do,  whereupon,  according  to  Bede,  he  had  a  vision 
in  which  he  saw  a  man  in  a  strange  dress  and  of  a 
weird  appearance,  who  asked  him  what  reward  he 
would  give  him  if  he  found  him  an  escape  from 
his  present  position,  and  if  he  secured  his  becoming 
a  mighty  king  greater  than  all  his  forefathers.  He 
further  asked  him  if  by  chance  he  came  to  his  father's 
throne  in  this  way,  and  if  a  man  came  to  him 
promising  him  a  new  life  and  a  new  law  better  than 
any  he  or  his  fathers  had  known,  he  would  believe 
and  obey  him  ?  /Edwin  promised  that  he  would. 
The  apparition  then  gave  him  a  sign  by  which  the 
occasion  should  be  remembered,  namely,  by  putting 
his  hand  on  his  head  in  some  peculiar  way  (perhaps 
making  the  sign  of  the  cross  is  meant),  and  dis- 
appeared. The  apparition  was  afterwards,  accord- 
ing to  the  legend,  recognised  by  ^dwin  as  that  of 
Paulinus.^  Soon  after,  the  same  friend  came  to  him 
and  said  the  King  had  changed  his  mind,  and  had  been 

'  Vide  infra,  p.  258. 


.EDWIN  OF  NORTHUMBRIA  253 

persuaded  by  the  Queen  that  it  would  be  a  shock- 
ing thing  to  betray  his  guest  for  gold,  and  had  made 
up  his  mind  rather  to  fight  ^thelfrid.  He  there- 
fore collected  an  army  and  marched  against  the 
latter.  He  did  not  give  him  time  to  collect  his 
forces,  but,  as  we  have  seen,  attacked  him  on 
the  eastern  bank  of  the  river  Idle,  a  tributary  of 
the  Trent  in  Nottinghamshire,^  and  defeated  and 
killed  him,  but  he  lost  his  own  son  Raegenhere  in 
the  strucrorle,^  The  battle  was  fouo^ht  about  the 
year  617. 

The  result  of  this  fight  was  very  important. 
yEthelfrid  had  been  a  mighty  king  and  conqueror, 
and  y^dwin  was  now  put  on  the  throne,  and  secured 
not  only  his  paternal  dominions  of  Deira,  but  also 
Bernicia,  and  drove  out  vEthelfrid's  sons,  with  a 
large  following  of  nobles  {iiobilimii)?  They  took 
shelter  among  the  Scots  or  Picts  [Scottos  sive 
Pictos\  and  there  they  were  taught  the  faith  and 
were  baptized  {ad  doctrmani  Scottoruui  cathecizati 
et  baptisviatis  sunt  gratia  recreati). 

.Edwin's  further  career  of  conquest  began  early  ; 
apparently  in  the  very  first  year  of  his  reign, 
he  attacked  a  British  principality  called  Elmet, 
which  still  existed  in  the  West  Riding  of  Yorkshire 
and  possibly  dominated  over  Lancashire  and  its 
borders.  Of  this  principality  Leeds  (Loidis)  was 
the  principal  town. 

By  this  conquest  ^dwin  extended  the  kingdom 
of  Deira  to   the   English   Pennines,   and  enclosed 

^  Vide  ante.  *  Bede^  ii.  12.  *  lb.  iii.  1. 


2  54    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE  S  MISSION 

the  West  Riding  within  his  dominions.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  at  the  same  time  he  also  became 
master  of  Lancashire,  and  thus  ruled  northern 
England  from  sea  to  sea. 

He  seems  now  to  have  turned  his  attention  to 
his  northern  neighbours,  among  whom  the  sons 
of  yEthelfrid  had  taken  refuge,  and  proceeded  to 
conquer  the  district  between  the  Firth  of  Forth 
and  the  Lammermuirs,  which  we  call  the  Lothians. 
There  he  planted  a  settlement  under  the  great 
rock  so  closely  associated  with  the  name  of  Arthur. 
This  fortified  post,  to  which  he  gave  its  name  of 
.r^dwinsburgh,  became  in  later  days  the  capital  of 
Scotland. 

Having  thus  punished  his  northern  neighbours, 
and  perhaps  compelled  them  to  give  up  the 
shelter  which  they  had  offered  to  the  sons  of 
.^thelfrid,  he  seems  to  have  begun  a  long  and 
a  terrible  warfare  against  the  Britons  of  Wales. 
Of  this  we  have  no  details  in  the  English  chron- 
icles, but  the  Welsh  poems  preserve  some  grim 
memories  of  it.  The  war  was  apparently  carried 
on  against  Cadvan,  the  King  of  North  Wales,  and 
his  son  Cadwallon. 

yEdwin  pushed  his  conquests  out  into  the 
west,  and  even  as  far  as  the  two  islands  of 
Menavia,  i.e.  the  Isle  of  Man  and  Anglesea. 
Nennius  expressly  says  he  conquered  the 
Menavias  (in  the  plural).  Bede  tells  us  that  the 
southern  Menavia,  i.e.  Anglesea,  was  more  fruitful 
and  richer    than  the  more  northern  one,  and  was 


.EDWIN  OF  NORTHUMBRIA  255 

occupied  by  960  families,  while  the  northern  one, 
i.e.  the  Isle  of  Man,  only  contained  300/ 

In  the  Cambrian  Annals  we  have  a  short 
pregnant  entry  under  the  year  629,  where  we  read 
that  Cadwallon  was  besieged  in  the  island  of 
Glannauc  {i.e.  Priestholm,  near  Anglesea).  This 
shows  the  stress  to  which  he  was  then  driven. 
yEdwin  had  now  become  the  most  powerful  ruler 
whom  the  Anglians  had  produced,  and  his  im- 
perial authority  probably  extended  from  the  Forth 
to  the  Thames,  or  rather  to  the  English  Channel, 
for  he  was  apparently  acknowledged  as  overlord  by 
all  England  except  perhaps  Kent.  Such  was  his 
fame  and  his  firm  grip  of  authority  that  Bede  tells 
us  it  had  become  proverbial  that  a  woman  with  a 
newborn  babe  could  safely  traverse  the  land  from 
sea  to  sea  without  molestation.  As  a  proof  of 
his  benevolence  it  is  told  of  him  that  in  many 
places  where  there  were  springs  of  water  near  the 
highways  he  put  up  stakes,  to  which  he  fastened 
brazen  cups,  that  travellers  might  refresh  themselves 
and  that  no  one  dared  remove  them.  Bede  tells  us 
further  that  he  was  wont  to  have  a  standard  carried 
before  him,  not  only  in  war-time,  but  also  when  he 
rode  with  his  officers  through  the  towns  and  villages, 
which  was  called  by  the  Romans  tufa,  and  by  the 
English  thimf}  The  ttcfa  is  mentioned  by  Vegetius 
among  the  military  standards,^  and  was  formed  of 
a  tuft  of  feathers — "  une  Tuffe  de  plumes,"  as  it 

1  Op.  cit.  ii.  9.  2  Bede,  ii.  16. 

^  Op.  cit.  iii.  cap.  5. 


256    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

is  called  in  a  charter  of  Gervase  of  Clifton  to 
Robert  de  Bevercotes  in  the  time  of  Richard  11/ 

While  ^dwin  was  a  fugitive  he  married 
Ouenburo-a,  the  daughter  of  Cearl,  whom  Bede 
calls  a  King  of  Mercia.  Of  this  Cearl  we  have  no 
independent  mention,  and  it  would  in  fact  seem 
that  there  was  no  kingdom  of  Mercia  at  this  time, 
and  that  that  kingdom  was  first  founded  by  Penda. 
It  is  more  probable  that  he  was  a  king  or  chief 
of  Wessex,  which  would  account  for  the  conduct 
of  the  Wessex  King,  Cwichelm,  to  be  presently 
mentioned.  By  Ouenburga  i^dwin  had  two  sons, 
namely,  Osfrid  and  Eadfrid.^ 

Now  that  he  had  become  a  mighty  potentate, 
yEdwin  was  anxious  to  ally  himself  with  the  blood 
of  ^thelberht,  which  had  been,  as  we  have  seen, 
strengthened  by  a  graft  from  the  famous  royal 
line  of  the  Prankish  Kings.  It  is  possible  that 
his  former  wife  was  still  living,  we  do  not  know, 
but  we  now  find  him  making  advances  to  Eadbald, 
the  son  of  ^^thelberht,  for  the  hand  of  his  sister 
^thelberga. 

Eadbald  replied  that  it  was  not  lawful  to  give 
a  Christian    maiden    in    marriage   to   a    man    who 

o 

knew  not  the  true  God.  Upon  which  yEdwin 
said  that  she  and  those  she  brought  with  her 
should  be  free  to  worship  in  any  fashion  they 
pleased,  and  that  he  himself  would  become  a 
Christian  if  he  found  on  due  examination  that 
that  religion  was  worthier  than  his  own. 

1  M.H.B.  168,  note  c.  2  Bede,  ii.  14. 


^DWIN^S  CONVERSION  257 

Thereupon,  the  Princess  was  duly  sent,  with  her 
attendants.  With  them  went  PauHnus,  who  was 
consecrated  a  bishop  on  21st  July  625,  by  Justus, 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Christianity,  as  we 
have  seen,  was  at  this  moment  limited  among  the 
Anglo-Saxons  to  the  Kentish  subjects  of  Eadbald, 
and  to  such  a  sophisticated  form  of  that  faith  as 
was  partially  followed  in  East  Anglia.  In  setting 
out  on  his  journey  Paulinus  was  like  Augustine, 
a  veritable  missionary  bishop.  We  are  told  that 
Cwichelm,  the  King  of  Wessex,  now  sent  one  of 
his  men  called  Eomer  with  a  poisoned  dagger 
to  assassinate  yEdwin.  The  King  was  spending 
the  Easter  feast  of  626  at  his  royal  villa  on  the 
river  Derwent.  This  has  been  identified  as  Aldby.^ 
The  messenger  had  an  interview  with  the  King, 
durinor  which  he  struck  at  ^dwin  with  his  dao-o-er, 
but  Lilla,  the  King's  thane  (not  having  his  shield 
with  him),  intervened  his  own  body,  and  the  blow 
was  so  determined  that  the  blade  went  right 
through  him  and  wounded  ^dwin.  The  men  who 
were  standing  round  thereupon  slew  Eomer.^ 

The  same  night  yEthelberga  bore  her  husband 
a  daughter,  who  was  named  Eanfleda.  The  King 
duly  thanked  his  gods  in  the  presence  of  Paulinus, 
and  the  latter  offered  his  to  Christ,  and  assured 
y^dwin  that  the  child  had  been  born  in  answer  to 
his  own  prayers.  He  was  greatly  pleased  at  this, 
and  promised  that  if  he  returned  successfully  from 
his  war  against  the  West  Saxons  he  would  become 


258    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

a  Christian,  and  in  token  of  his  sincerity  he  per- 
mitted him  to  baptize  the  child,  who  thus  became 
the  first-fruits  of  his  mission  among  the  Northum- 
brians. At  the  same  time  eleven  other  families 
were  also  baptized.  This  was  on  the  8th  June 
626.^ 

y^dwin,  having  recovered  from  his  wound, 
marched  against  the  West  Saxons  and  destroyed 
or  received  the  submission  of  all  who  had  conspired 
against  him.^  The  statement  in  the  Anglo-Saxon 
Chronicle  (which  in  this  portion,  in  so  far  as  it  is 
of  any  value,  was  apparently  entirely  dependent 
upon  Bede)  that  he  slew  five  of  their  kings,  seems 
absolutely  without  foundation. 

On  his  return  home,  y^dwin  was  indisposed  to 
carry  out  his  promise  to  Paulinus  to  become  a 
Christian,  without  further  consideration  {inconsulte), 
although  he  gave  up  his  idols.  He  conferred  much 
with  the  bishop,  and  also  with  those  among  his 
chieftains  whom  he  considered  to  be  most  wise, 
and  asked  them  what  they  thought  should  be  done. 
He  no  doubt  feared  (and  as  it  proved  had  good 
reason  to  fear)  that  the  revenge  of  the  pagan 
party,  which  had  been  powerful  enough  to  deprive 
^thelberht  of  Kent  of  his  great  supremacy,  and 
to  transfer  it  for  a  while  to  Redwald  of  East 
Anglia,  might  undo  him  also. 

One  day,  according  to  Bede's  story,  Paulinus 
entered  his  room  and,  putting  his  hand  on  his  head 
(which    was    the    sign    which    the    apparition    had 

1  Bede,  ii.  9.  »  A 


EDWIN'S  CONVERSION  259 

given  him  in  his  distress  when  at  Redwald's 
court),  reminded  him  of  the  promise  which  he  had 
then  made  to  him.  ^dwin,  says  Bede,  "hke  a 
man  of  great  natural  sagacity  often  sat  alone  for 
a  long  time  together  in  silence,  holding  many  a 
conversation  with  himself  in  the  depth  of  his  heart, 
considering  what  he  ought  to  do  and  what  religion 
he  should  observe."^ 

At  this  point,  and  before  he  reports  ^Edwin's 
conversion,  Bede  inserts  two  letters  from  the  Pope 
to  ^dwin  and  his  wife  respectively,  which  he 
attributes  to  Pope  Boniface  the  Fifth.  I  have 
discussed  these  letters  in  the  Introduction,  where  I 
have  argued  that  they  are  very  suspicious. 

^dwin  having  discussed  his  position  with 
Paulinus,  determined,  before  finally  committing 
himself,  again  to  debate  the  matter  with  the 
princes,  his  friends,  and  his  counsellors  [mnicis 
et  consiliariis  szcis),  so  that  if  their  view  coincided 
with  his  own  they  might  all  be  baptized  together. 
Paulinus  approved  of  this,  and  a  Witenagemote, 
or  great  council  of  his  kingdom,  was  accordingly 
summoned.  At  this  the  King  asked  every  one 
individually  what  he  thought  of  this  new  teaching. 

The  first  to  speak  was  Coifi  (a  name  which 
Kemble  says  was  equivalent  to  Coefig  or  Cefig,  i.e. 
the  bold  or  active  one),  the  head  priest  {Primus 
pontifiamt)  of  the  old  pagan  religion,  who  had 
apparently  been  previously  approached.  He  bade 
the  King  decide  for  himself,  for  as  far  as  he  was 

I  Bede,  ii.  9. 


2  6o    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

concerned  he  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  faith  he  had  hitherto  professed  had  neither 
virtue  nor  profit  in  it.  "  None  of  your  people,"  he 
said — or  as  the  Anglo-Saxon  version  has  it,  "  None 
of  your  thanes"  [thegna) — "has  been  more  faithful 
to  the  old  gods  than  myself,  yet  there  are  many 
among  them  who  have  received  greater  gifts  and 
dignities  than  I  have,  and  have  also  had  greater 
luck  in  their  plans  and  their  gains.  If  the  old  gods 
had  any  real  power,  they  would  have  favoured  me, 
their  most  devoted  worshipper."  "If  you  there- 
fore, on  a  due  examination,  find  the  new  things 
now  preached  are  better  and  stronger,  let  us  all 
adopt  them  without  delay." 

The  speech  of  Coifi  was  followed  by  that  of  one 
of  the  King's  ealdormen  {alius  optimatum  regis), 
who  spoke  in  a  more  serious  and  elevated  mood. 
He  said  that  "man's  life  here,  in  comparison  with 
the  time  beyond,  of  which  we  know  nothing,  is 
as  if  we  were  sitting  in  the  winter-time  at  supper 
with  your  ealdormen  and  thanes  {ctmi  ducibus  ac 
ministris  htis)  at  a  fire  in  the  middle  of  the 
hall  by  which  it  is  warmed,  while  outside  were 
storms  of  wintry  rain  and  snow,  and  a  sparrow 
were  to  enter  and  fly  quickly  through  the  house, 
in  at  one  door  and  out  at  the  other.  While  it  was 
inside  it  would  be  untouched  by  the  wintry  storm, 
but  when  that  moment  of  calm  had  run  out,  it  would 
pass  again  from  winter  into  winter,  and  you  would 
lose  sight  of  it.  So  this  life  is  a  short  interlude  ;  of 
what  follows  it,  and  of  what  went  before,  we  know 


^DVVIN^S  BAPTISM  261 

nothing.  I  f  this  new  teaching,  therefore,  has  brought 
any  sure  knowledge  to  us,  we  would  do  well  to 
follow  it."  This  beautiful  simile  shows  that  the 
great  council  meeting  took  place  in  winter.  The  rest 
of  the  King's  hereditary  chieftains  {ceteri  majores 
natu)  and  his  counsellors  now  followed  (and  by 
God's  instigation)  in  the  same  strain. 

Coifi  again  intervening,  now  suggested  that 
they  would  like  to  hear  Paulinus.  When  they  had 
done  so,  Coifi  said  :  "I  have  long  felt  that  what 
we  have  worshipped  has  been  nothing  at  all 
[nihil  esse,  quod  colebajims),  and  the  more  I  have 
sought  for  the  truth  in  it,  the  less  I  have  found 
it.  I  now  acknowledfje  that  in  the  new  teach- 
ing  shines  the  truth,  which  can  give  us  the 
gifts  of  life  and  health  and  everlasting  happiness. 
I  propose,  therefore,  that  we  ban  and  burn  the 
temples  and  altars  which  we  have  consecrated  to 
no  profit." 

Thereupon  the  King  gave  permission  to  Paulinus 
openly  to  preach  the  Gospel,  and  himself  renounced 
idolatry.  When  he  asked  Coifi  who  should  first 
profane  the  altars  and  shrines  with  their  enclosures 
{cum  septis,  i.e.  the  frith-geard  or  heath-tun  of  the 
Angles),  he  answered  :  "  I  in  my  folly  cherished 
them,  and  who  but  myself  when  enlightened  by 
God's  wisdom  should  undo  them."  So  he  girded 
himself  with  a  sword,  and  mounting  the  King's 
charger  [et  ascendens  emissarium  regis)  proceeded 
to  the  idols.  The  multitude  thought  him  mad. 
When  he  drew  near  the  temple  he  cast  his  lance 


262    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

at  it,  and  thus  desecrated  it,  and  bade  his 
companions  destroy  and  fire  the  fane  and  all  its 
sacred  hedges  [fanuin  cum  omnibus  septis  suis). 
Dr.  G.  F.  Maclear  remarks  that  this  action  must 
have  looked  like  that  of  a  madman  to  his  people, 
for  as  a  priest  he  could  not  bear  arms,  or  ride, 
except  on  a  mare/ 

The  place  which  was  afterwards  shown  as  the 
site  of  the  idol  temple,  says  Bede,  was  not  far 
from  York,  towards  the  east  and  beyond  the 
Derwent,  and  "is  called  Godmunddingaham "  ^ 
(now  Godmanham,  i.e.  the  enclosure  of  the  gods, 
near  Market  Weighton).^  Smith  says  it  was  situated 
near  the  Roman  Delgovitia,  which  Camden  derives 
from  the  British  Delgwe,  meaning  statues  of  the 
gods.  In  regard  to  the  whole  incident,  Bede  adds, 
quoting  Vergil,  that  the  chief  priest  "destroyed  the 
altars  which  he  had  himself  consecrated  "  {destruxit 
eas  quas  ipse  saa^averat,  aras). 

We  are  next  told  that  the  King  with  all  his 
nobles  {cum  cunciis  gentis  suae  nobilibus),  and  a 
great  crowd  of  people  were  baptized  on  Easter 
Day,  1 2th  April  627.  This  ceremony  took  place 
at  York,  in  the  wooden  church  dedicated  to  the 
Apostle  Peter,  which  y^dwin  had  built  hastily 
when  he  was  a  catechumen  under  instruction  for 
baptism  (cum  cathecizaretur).  This  (no  doubt)  very 
rude  structure  was  the  first-recorded  church  on 
the  site   of  York    Minster.      Bede  tells   us   that  a 

^  The  English^  p.  52.  -  Bede^  ii.  13. 

'  Bishop  Browne,  op.  cit.  181,  and  note  i. 


Ground  Plan  of  the  Church  of  Paulinus  at  York. 


To  face  p.  262. 


EDWIN'S  BAPTISM  263 

certain  Abbot  of  Peartaneu  (Parteney,  near  Spilsby, 
in  Lincolnshire  ;  it  was  a  cell  of  Bardney  and  after- 
wards absorbed  by  the  latter)  reported  that  a  man 
of  great  veracity,  called  Deda,  told  him  that  he 
had  talked  with  an  aged  man  who  was  baptized  by 
Paulinus  in  the  river  Trent  in  the  presence  of  King 
-^dwin. 

It  is  a  curious  fact,  for  which  we  have  no 
adequate  explanation,  that  Nennius  and  the 
Cambrian  Annals  say  that  ^dwin  was  converted 
by  Run  map  Urbgen,  i.e.  Run,  the  son  of  Urien, 
who  continued  to  baptize  his  people,  the  Ambrones, 
for  forty  days.  By  Ambrones  the  people  on  the 
river  Umber  {i.e.  the  Northumbrians)  are  perhaps 
meant.  How  the  name  Run  came  to  be  substituted 
for  Paulinus  I  do  not  know.  It  is  not  difficult, 
however,  to  convert  Paulinus  into  Paul  i  hen,  and 
thus  make  a  Welshman  of  him,  as  was  in  fact 
done. 

./Edwin  made  plans  under  the  direction  of 
Paulinus  for  the  building  of  a  stone  church,  "a 
larger  and  more  august  basilica  of  stone  "  {curavit 
docente  eodem  Paulino,  majorem  ipso  in  loco  et 
augustiorem  de  lapide  fabricare  basilicam),  upon 
the  same  spot,  in  the  midst  of  which  he  enclosed 
his  earlier  chapel.  The  foundations  having  been 
laid,  he  began  to  build  a  four-sided  [per  quadrunt) 
basilica,  but  before  they  had  reached  their  full 
height,  the  King,  says  Bede,  "was  wickedly  slain, 
and  left  the  work  to  be  finished  by  his  successor 
Oswald."     It  was  subsequently  burnt  in   1069. 


2  64    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Mr.  Micklethwaite  tells  us  that  "the  works  at 
York  Minster,  which  followed  on  the  burning  of 
the  quire  in  1829,  brought  to  light  evidence  of  the 
earlier  buildings  on  the  site.  In  the  western  part 
of  the  quire,  below  everything  else,  there  was  found 
a  remarkable  foundation  of  concrete  and  timber. 
It  did  not  belong  to  the  present  building,  nor  to 
the  Norman  one  that  preceded  it,  but  to  something 
older ;  and  when  the  plan  of  it  is  laid  down  by 
itself,  it  appears  plainly  to  show  the  foundation  of 
a  basilican  church  with  a  transept  like  that  at 
Peterborough.  The  foundation  of  the  presbytery 
is  wanting,  and  was  probably  removed  in  the  course 
of  the  building  of  the  present  quire,  and  I  suspect 
something  is  also  wanting  at  the  west,  where  the 
central  tower  of  the  church  is  now,  and  that  the 
building  went  on  further,  far  enough  to  make  the 
nave  equal  the  transept  in  length.  The  width  of 
the  transept  was  about  30  feet,  and  that  between 
the  aisle  walls  about  68  feet.  If  the  ancient  walling 
which  remains  visible  at  the  sides  of  the  site  of  the 
nave  be  the  substructure  of  the  arcades  of  the  first 
church,  the  middle  span  was  about  30  feet,  but,  if 
they  be  later,  it  may  have  been  a  little  more.  The 
continuation  of  the  foundation  all  across,  in  line 
with  the  western  wall  of  the  transept,  seems  to 
point  fo  the  substitution  of  an  arcade  for  the 
'triumpnal'  arch  in  that  place." ^  Bishop  Browne 
quotes  Canon  Raine  as  writing  of  the  present 
crypt :    "  In   another   peculiar   place   is   the  actual 

^  Arch.  Journ.  1896,  pp.  305-306. 


DISTINGUISHED  NORTHUMBRIAN  CONVERTS  265 

site,  if  I  mistake  not,  of  the  font  in  which  ^dwin 
became  a  Christian."^ 

Paulinus  continued  for  six  years  after  the 
King's  baptism  to  preach  the  Word  in  the  pro- 
vince with  the  consent  and  goodwill  of  ^dwin 
and  without  a  break — that  is  to  say,  till  the  end 
of  yEdwin's  reign. 

Amonof  those  who,  according  to  Bede,  at  this 
time  "believed  and  were  baptized,  being  pre- 
ordained to  eternal  life,"  were  Osfrid  and  Eadfrid, 
Edwin's  sons  whom  he  had  had  by  Ouenburga,  the 
daughter  of  King  Cearl.  Subsequently  the  children 
he  had  by  i^thelberga,  namely,  ^^dilhun  and 
y^dilthryd,  and  another  son  named  Wuscfrea,  were 
also  baptized.  Of  these  latter  the  two  former  died 
when  young  {albati  adhiic  rapti  sunt)  and  were 
buried  at  York.^  So  great  was  the  fervour  for 
the  faith,  that  on  one  occasion  when  Paulinus  went 
with  the  King  and  Queen  to  the  royal  vill  {in 
villain  regiam),  which  was  called  Adgefrin,  i.e. 
Ad  Gefrin,  now  called  Yeverin,  in  Glendale,^ 
he  spent  six -and -thirty  days  from  morning  till 
night  in  catechising  and  in  baptizing  in  the  river 
Glen  [in  fluvio  Gleni).  This  is  now  called  the 
Beaumont  water,  a  tributary  of  the  Till.*  The  vill 
just  named  was,  according  to  Bede,  laid  waste  in 
later  times  and  replaced  by  another  at  Maelmin.^ 

^  Ahuifi  of  York,  p.  81,  by  Bishop  Browne. 

^  Bede,  ii.  14.  ^  Plummer,  ii.  pp.  104  and  105. 

*  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  p.  105. 

*  Smith,  in  a  note  to  Bede,  and  following  Camden,  col.  1097,  ed. 
1753,  identifies  this  with  Millfield,  near  Wooler.     Mindrum,  higher 


266    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

In  Deira  (roughly  Yorkshire)  Paulinus  also 
had  a  marked  success.  We  are  told  he  used 
to  baptize  in  the  river  Swale,  which  flows  past 
the  village  of  Cataractam  [i.e.  Catterick,  called 
Cetrehtan  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  version),  for,  as 
Bede  says,  the  Church  was  then  only  in  its  infancy 
and  they  had  not  been  able  to  build  oratories  (i.e. 
chapels)  or  baptisteries  {pratoria  vel  baptisteria). 

At  Campodonum,^  where  there  was  a  royal 
vill,  he  built  a  basilica  which  was  probably  made  of 
wood "  and  was  afterwards  burnt,  as  was  the  whole 
place,  by  the  heathens  who  slew  King  ^dwin. 
Its  altar,  however,  which  was  of  stone,  escaped  the 
fire,  and,  when  Bede  wrote,  was  still  preserved  in  the 
monastery  of  the  abbot  and  priest  Thrydwulf,  in 
Elmet  Wood.^  Bishop  Browne  tells  us  that  Paulinus 
"  left  his  mark  on  Northumbria.  '  Pallinsburn/  in 
the  north  of  Northumberland,  still  commemorates 
him.  It  used  to  be  said  that  an  inscription  on  a 
cross  at   Dewsbury  recorded  his  preaching  there.* 

up  the  Glen,  on  the  borders  of  Northumberland  and  Roxburgh,  has 
also  been  suggested,  while  Mr.  C.  J.  Bates  suggests  Kirk  Newton, 
where  there  is  a  church  dedicated  to  St.  Gregory.  See  Plummer, 
Bede^  ii.  105. 

^  It  is  called  Donafeld  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  version,  a  name  pos- 
sibly still  surviving  in  Doncaster  ;  perhaps  Slack,  near  Huddersfield 
(Plummer,  ii.  105).  It  has  also  been  identified  with  Tanfield,  near 
Ripon  (see  Smith's  Bede). 

^  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  version  of  Bede  the  word  here  used  for 
"  built "  is  gettnibran.,  showing  how  general  was  the  use  of  wooden 
buildings  at  this  time. 

"  Beds,  ii.  14. 

*  Bright,  138,  note  i.  Camden  mentions  this  cross,  and  says  it 
was  inscribed  '"''  Hie  Paulinus  p7-aedicavW  {Briit.  col.  709).  A  suc- 
cessor to  it,  according  to  Whitaker,  was  accidentally  destroyed  in  1812 
(Loidis  and  Elmete,  299). 


te  1 


^T*** 


J 


pW^^S^W^'^^^^^' 


The  Two  Sides  of  the  Cross  in  the  Churchyard  at  Whalley. 

To  face  p.  266. 


THE  PREACHING  OF  PAULINUS  267 

In  the  time  of  Edward  the  Second  the  boundary 
of  some  land  near  Easingwold  is  described  as  ex- 
tending 'usque  ad  cruces  PaulinV  {i.e.  as  far  as  the 
crosses  of  Paulinus),  while  Brafferton,  near  Easing- 
wold, is,  by  local  tradition,  made  a  baptizing  and 
preaching  place  of  Paulinus/  A  cross  of  Paulinus 
again,  is  still  shown  at  Whalley,  in  Lancashire,  one 
of  three  remarkable  Anglian  shafts  remaining  in  that 
most  interesting  churchyard,  and  the  one  of  all  the 
early  shafts  still  preserved  among  us  which  most 
suits  by  its  style  that  very  early  ascription."^ 

"  Paulinus,"  says  Bede,  "also  preached  the  Word 
in  the  province  of  Lindissi,  which  was  situated  south 
of  the  Humber,  and  reached  to  the  sea"^(/.^.  the 
later  Lincolnshire  ;  it  then  probably  formed  a  part 
of  Northumbria).  He  further  tells  us  that  Blaecca, 
whom  he  calls  the  prsefect  of  the  city  {civitatis) 
of  Lindocolina  {i.e.  Lincoln),  with  his  family  were 
converted.  Florence  of  Worcester  professes  to 
give  his  pedigree  up  to  Woden,  and  says  that  his 
ancestor  was  oriven  Thong-  Castle,  with  all  Lincoln- 
shire,  by  Hengist.  In  that  city  he  built  a  stone 
church  of  beautiful  workmanship  {operis  egregii  de 
lapide),  the  roof  of  which,  he  says,  has  been  brought 
down  {dejectd)  either  by  long  neglect  or  by  the 
hands  of  enemies,  but  the  walls  are  still  stand- 
ing, and  every  year  some  miracles  of  healing  are 
displayed  on  the  spot  for  the  benefit  of  those  who 
seek  the  faith.      It  was  in  this  church,  according  to 

^  Murray's  Yorkshire,  230. 

^  Browne,  Augustme  and  his  Companions,  183. 

^  Bede.  ii.  16. 


268    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Bede,    that    on    the    death    of    Justus,     ch^.    630, 
Honorius  was  consecrated  archbishop  in  his  stead.  ^ 
Mr.  Mason  says  in  a  note  that  it  now  goes  by  the 
name  of  St.  Paul's,  which  is  short  for  St.  Paulinus. 
Bede  says,  in  regard  to  the  conversion  of  the 
province,  that  he  was  told  a  story  by  a  very  truth- 
ful   {veracissimus)  presbyter,  a  man    called    Deda. 
He   was   abbot    of   the    Monastery    of    Parteney. 
He    reported    that     he     had    been    informed    by 
an  elderly   man    [qiiendam   sefiiorevi)  that   he  had 
been  baptized  in  the  middle  of  the  day  by  Bishop 
Paulinus  (in    the  presence  of   King    y^dwin,    and 
with  him  a  multitude  of  people)  in  the  river  Trent 
(Treenta),  near  a  city  {jzcxta  civitateni)  which  was 
called,    in    the    language    of    the    Angles,    Tiouul- 
fingacaestir}    In  the  Anglo-Saxon  version  it  is  called 
Teolfinga  ceastre.      I  agree  with  Mr.  Plummer  that 
the  name  has  nothing  to  do  with  that  of  Torksey, 
with  which  it  has  been  equated,  and  which  is  called 
Turcesig    in    the    Ajtglo-Saxon    Chronicle    in  873. 
There  is  good  reason  to  believe  it  was  at  or  near 
Farndon,  where  the  old  ford  across  the  Trent  was 
placed. 

Dr.  Bright  tells  us  that  Southwell  in  Nottingham- 
shire has  always  claimed  Paulinus  as  its  founder.^ 
The  old  man  mentioned  by  Deda,  who  had  been 
baptized  by  Paulinus  and  therefore  knew  him  well, 
described  him  as  of  tall  stature,  somewhat  bent,  with 

^  Bede,  ii.  i6.  2  /^  jj    jg 

^  P.  141,  note.  He  argues  that  the  tradition  arose  from  the  fact 
that,  from  Saxon  times,  St.  Mary's  of  Southwell  was  subject  to  St. 
Peter's  of  York. 


THE  LATER  REIGN  OF  HERACLIUS       269 

black  hair,  spare  face,  and  a  very  thin  hooked  nose  ; 
lookinor  at  the  same  time  venerable  and  fierce 
{venerabilis  siinul  et  terribilis  aspecht).  He  had 
with  him  as  his  assistant  James,  a  deacon,  and  a 
man  both  indefatigable  and  noble  {industrmvt  ac 
nobileni)  in  Christ  and  in  the  Church. 

Bede  says  that  Archbishop  Justus  died  on  the 
loth  November.^  He  does  not  state  the  year,  which 
was  probably  630.^ 

Before  we  deal  with  the  next  archbishop  and 
his  career,  it  will  be  convenient  to  make  a  survey 
of  the  progress  of  events  in  other  parts  of  the 
Christian  world  at  this  time. 

I  brought  down  the  reign  of  Heraclius  to 
the  point  where  by  his  vigour  and  genius  he  had 
trampled  on  the  power  of  the  Persians  and  restored 
the  Eastern  limits  of  the  Empire  to  their  farthest 
stretch  as  in  the  days  of  Justinian,  and  I  have  also 
referred  to  his  temporary  success  in  allaying  the 
great  feuds  which  then  rent  the  Church,  or  at  least  the 
Eastern  portion  of  it.  I  must  now  turn  to  a  very 
different  story,  namely,  that  of  his  disastrous  later 
life.  No  more  tragical  contrast  exists  in  history, 
nor  one  more  inexplicable.  That  one  who  had 
shown  such  skill,  resource,  and  energy  should 
have  almost  suddenly  lost  his  initiative  and  power 

1  Bede,  ii.  18. 

2  The  Anglo-Saxon  Chr.,  MS.  E,  a  twelfth  century  Peterborough 
document  and  a  poor  authority,  puts  it  in  627,  but  this  date  does  not 
occur  in  the  Canterbury  copies  of  the  Chronicle,  MSS.  A  and  F. 
Smith,  in  his  edition  of  Bede,  argues  that  it  was  about  630,  which  is 
probably  right. 


2  70     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

of  will  and  allowed  his  mind  to  become  entangled 
in  the  metaphysical  struggles  of  priests  and  monks 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  care  and  solicitude  for 
his  country  and  people,  and  permitted  a  new 
and  a  very  long-lived  enemy  of  the  Empire 
to  overwhelm  one-half  of  it  so  effectually  that  it 
passed  completely  out  of  his  control,  is  indeed  a 
puzzle. 

The  enemy  in  question  came  from  Arabia  and 
its  borders,  and  were  known  very  widely  as 
Saracens,  and  in  race,  physique,  and  temperament 
greatly  resembled  the  Jews/  A  great  prophet 
arose  among  this  race,  who  seized  (as  prophets 
sometimes  do)  the  imagination  and  the  peculiar 
instincts  of  the  Arabs,  and  produced  not  only  a 
new  departure,  but  a  new  religion  in  which  a  great 
deal  was  directly  adopted  from  the  Jews :  not 
merely  the  patriarchal  story  and  various  legends 
which  were  mingled  with  others  from  the  desert, 
but  the  great  cardinal  feature  which  united  Jews 
and  themselves,  namely,  the  worship  of  one  God 
who  divided  his  authority  with  no  other  being  and 
would  tolerate  no  rivals  under  any  form  or  name. 
Muhammed  modified  considerably  but  not  entirely, 
and  then  incorporated,  the  ethical  teaching  of  the 
later  Jews.     Having  bound  his  followers  together  in 


*  The  name  Saracen,  of  doubtful  etymology,  was,  so  far  as  we 
know,  first  applied  among  the  classical  writers  by  Ammianus 
Marcellinus,  who,  writing  in  the  second  half  of  the  fourth  century, 
applies  it  to  certain  tribes  of  plundering  Arabs  on  the  Roman 
frontier.  It  was  afterwards  used  as  a  generic  name  for  the  pred^' 
tory  Arabs. 


THE  RISE  OF  MUHAMMEDANISM         271 

a  very  powerful  leash,  as  the  children  and  servants 
of  Allah  (their  form  of  Jehovah),  he  bade  them 
fight  the  battle  of  their  one  and  only  God  with 
merciless  persistence  against  all  idolaters,  and 
against  the  Christians,  whose  belief  in  a  Triune 
deity  could  not,  in  Muhammedan  eyes,  be  dis- 
entangled from  a  worship  of  three  gods.  In  the 
name  of  Allah  he  promised  them  great  rewards 
not  only  in  this  world,  but  in  the  next,  where  those 
who  died  or  suffered  for  their  faith  would  live 
such  Sybaritic  lives  in  heaven  as  the  desert 
children  had  never  dreamed  of. 

This  was  not  all.  It  seems  plain  to  me  that 
Muhammed  not  only  derived  a  large  part  of  his 
sacred  book  from  the  Bible  of  the  Jews,  but  that 
the  large  number  of  Jews,  many  of  them  fugitives, 
who  then  lived  in  Arabia  and  its  borders,  and  who 
had  been  very  harshly  treated  by  the  Emperor  and 
the  officials  of  the  Church,  did  a  great  deal  to  incite 
the  Arab  race,  already  on  fire  with  the  eloquent 
appeal  made  to  their  hearts  and  their  passions  by 
their  prophet.  They  also  helped  in  a  great  many 
ways  to  keep  alive  the  undying  and  unquenchable 
heroism  and  furore  of  the  descendants  of  Ishmael. 
The  latter  were  further  incited  and  inspirited  by  their 
priests,  whose  role  may  be  compared  with  that  of 
the  children  of  St.  Dominic  in  the  terrible  cam- 
paigns against  the  Albigenses.  It  is,  further,  pretty 
certain  that  both  the  Jews  and  their  own  Fakirs 
and  Kadhis  would  present  in  most  attractive  shape 
the  prize  that  was  within  their  reach  if  they  behaved 


272    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

like  men.  They  urged  them,  no  doubt,  to  hit  the 
weary  giant  whose  heart  was  at  Constantinople  some 
heavy  blows,  where  his  limbs  were  most  paralysed 
by  the  internecine  religious  feuds  of  the  orthodox 
and  the  heterodox  among  the  Christians.  They 
further,  doubtless,  offered  as  a  bait  a  rich  booty  of 
gold  and  silver,  silks  and  spices,  with  which  the 
provinces  of  old  Rome  still  teemed,  which  must 
have  been  very  inviting  to  warriors  whose  lives  had 
been  so  hard  and  whose  fare  had  been  so  scant. 
This  is  all  clear,  but  it  would  hardly  have  availed 
against  the  disciplined  forces  which  sent  the  great 
Chosroes  to  his  grave,  if  it  had  not  been  for  the 
mental  and  moral  paralysis  which  overtook  Heraclius 
in  his  later  days. 

Muhammed,  having  secured  the  adhesion  of  a 
large  number  of  his  countrymen  in  Arabia,  wrote 
in  628  to  the  Emperor,  to  the  King  of  Persia,  and 
to  the  King  of  Abyssinia  urging  them  to  adopt  the 
Faith,  The  King  of  Abyssinia  accepted  the  invita- 
tion in  an  enthusiastic  and  humble  letter.  Chosroes, 
transported  with  fury,  characteristically  ordered  the 
Governor  of  Yemen  to  send  him  the  insolent  Arab 
in  chains.  Heraclius  said  neither  yes  nor  no,  but 
sent  presents  to  Muhammed  in  acknowledgment  of 
his  communication,^  In  632  Muhammed  died,  and 
was  succeeded  as  khalif  {i.e.  successor)  by  Abubekr, 
who  at  once  planned  with  Omar  an  attack  on  Persia 
and  on  "New"  Rome.  Khalid  ("the  sword  of 
God  ")  was  sent  into  Irak  against  the  former,  and  four 

*  Bury,  Hisi.  0/  the  Laier  Roman  Empire,  ii.  ?6i-2, 


THE  ARAB  CONQUEST  OF  SYRIA         273 

other  generals  were  sent  into  Syria,  who  quickly 
captured  Bostra  and  Gaza  ;  and  presently  a  Roman 
army  was  defeated  on  the  banks  of  the  Yermuk, 
which  falls  into  the  sea  of  Tiberias.     This  battle 
decided  the  fate  of  Damascus,   which  fell  in  635. 
Emessa  or  Hims  and  Heliopolis  or  Baalbek  were 
taken    a    year    later,    whereupon     Heraclius,     who 
was  either  at  Edessa  or  Antioch,  abandoned  Syria 
and  fled   to   Chalcedon.      Abubekr  had   died  soon 
after  the  fight  at  Yermuk,  and  had  been  succeeded 
as    khalif   by    Omar.      Tiberias,    Chalcis,    Beroea, 
Epiphania,    and     Larissa    successively    fell,    while 
Edessa  agreed  to  pay  tribute.     Antioch,  the  seat 
of  one  of  the  five  patriarchs,  was  next  taken.     As 
Mr.   Bury  says,  there    can    be    no   doubt   that  the 
rapid    conquest    of    Syria    was    facilitated    by    the 
apostasy  of  Christians  as  well  as  the  treachery  of 
Jews.      In    62,7    Jerusalem,  the   seat   of   a    second 
patriarchate,  also   fell   after  a  siege  of  two  years. 
Omar    was    conducted    round     the    city    by    the 
obsequious   patriarch    Sophronius,    and   a   mosque 
was   built   on    the    site    of   Solomon's    temple.     A 
desperate  but  futile  attempt  was  made  to  recover 
Syria,   but    the   Roman    army  was    utterly  beaten, 
and   for  some  centuries  it   remained   in  the  hands 
of  the    Muhammedans.       The  conquest   of   Syria 
was    speedily   followed    by    that    of    Mesopotamia. 
Edessa,    Constantina,    and     Daras    were    captured 
in    639.       A    year    earlier,    the    Persian    Empire 
had    been    laid    in    the    dust    by   the    defeat    of 
its   armies   at   Cadesia   after    a    four    days'    fight. 


18 


2  74     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Shortly  after,  its  capital  Ctesiphon  was  taken  and 
sacked.  Presently  "the  battle  of  Nehavend,  'the 
victory  of  victories,'  stamped  out  for  ever  the 
dynasty  of  the  Sassanids,  which  had  lasted  some- 
what more  than  four  hundred  years,  226-641."^ 

Egypt  was  the  next  to  fall.  If,  says  Mr.  Bury, 
a  foreign  invader  was  welcome  to  some  in  Syria, 
still  more  was  he  welcome  in  Egypt.  The  native 
Copts,  who  were  Jacobites,  hated  the  Greeks,  who 
were  Melkites,  and  this  element  was  made  use  of 
by  Amru,  the  Arab  general,  to  effect  his  conquest, 
which  was  rapidly  carried  through  ;  its  capital,  the 
mighty  and  famous  city  of  Alexandria,  falling  on 
December  641,  and  being  replaced  as  the  seat  of 
government  by  Fostat,  afterwards  called  Cairo. 
Heraclius  himself  died  on  the  iith  of  February 
of  the  same  year. 

The  political  and  economical  effect  of  these 
conquests,  by  which  some  of  the  richest  provinces 
in  the  Empire  passed  into  other  hands,  must  have 
been  appalling.  Not  less  appalling  must  they  have 
been  in  their  effect  upon  the  whole  public  con- 
science and  sense  of  pride  and  of  self-respect  of 
the  Christian  world.  It  was  doubtless  due  to 
three  causes — the  paralysis  in  the  character  and 
will  of  the  Emperor  ;  the  animosities  of  the  various 
Christian  sects  against  each  other,  and  of  all  of  them 
against  the  Jews,  which  were  vigorously  returned  ; 
and  lastly,  the  fact  that  the  men  from  the  desert 
were  strong  men  with  a  strong  faith  in  themselves 

^  Bury,  op.  cit.  269. 


EFFECTS  OF  THE  ARAB  CONQUEST      275 

and  their  religion,  while  the  subjects  of  the  Empire 
were  as  weak  in  morals  as  they  were  physically. 
Mr.  Bury  has  quoted  a  graphic  sentence  in  which 
the  Imperial  governor  of  Egypt  who  surrendered 
his  trust,  Mukankas,  justified  his  act  to  the  Emperor. 
"It  is  true,"  he  said,  "that  the  enemy  are  not 
nearly  so  numerous  as  we,  but  one  Mussulman  is 
equivalent  to  a  hundred  of  our  men.  Of  the 
enjoyments  of  the  earth  they  desire  only  simple 
clothing  and  simple  food,  and  yearn  for  the  death 
of  martyrs  because  it  leads  them  to  paradise,  while 
we  cling  to  life  and  its  joys,  and  fear  death."  ^ 

In  addition  to  the  results  here  named,  the  con- 
quests of  the  Arabs  had  a  far-reaching  if  not  quite 
immediate  effect  upon  the  Papacy.  Up  to  this 
time  the  Pope,  if  generally  acknowledged  as  the 
senior  administrative-officer  of  the  Church,  was  so 
rather  in  regard  to  precedence  than  dominance. 
He  shared  his  position  as  Patriarch  with  four 
others,  three  of  whom  had  titles  as  old  as  his  own, 
and  each  of  whom  had  a  jurisdiction  within  his 
province  as  independent  as  his  own.  One  of  them, 
who  presided  at  Alexandria,  governed  a  Church 
which  had  been  famous  for  its  learning  and  for 
the  number  of  theologians  it  had  produced.  It 
was  in  these  respects  far  more  famous  than 
Rome.  The  relative  positions  of  the  three 
Patriarchs  just  named  were  now  to  be  entirely 
altered.  They  became  more  or  less  insignificant 
personages,  with  great  titles,   but  with  very  scant 

^  op.  cit.  270. 


2  76    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

power  and  influence.  Their  people  and  they 
themselves  became  the  subjects  of  Muhammedan 
rulers  instead  of  being  under  the  a^gis  of  the  ortho- 
dox Emperors.  They  became  poor  and  more  or 
less  illiterate  ;  their  schools  decayed,  their  theological 
influence  shrank  and  disappeared.  The  result  of 
all  this  was  the  great  enhancement  of  the  prestige 
of  the  two  Patriarchs  who  remained,  the  Pope  and 
the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  especially  of 
the  Pope  who,  living  in  the  Old  Rome  and  far 
away  from  New  Rome,  was  not  so  much  dominated 
by  the  Emperor  and  his  courtiers  as  his  brother- 
Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  while  the  adherence 
of  the  Lombard  and  Spanish  Arians  to  orthodoxy 
and  the  initiation  of  a  new  missionary  church  in 
Britain  added  greatly  to  the  extent  of  the  territory 
which  acknowledged  him  as  its  head.  This  en- 
hancement in  his  position,  however,  was  not 
immediately  forthcoming,  but  came  presently.^ 

^  If  we  try  to  realise  the  desolation  and  misery  caused,  and  the 
terrible  sufferings  and  bloodshed  which  resulted  in  later  years  in  half 
the  Eastern  Empire  by  its  conquest  by  the  Muhammedans,  we  shall 
indeed  wonder  that  a  Christian  priest,  the  latest  historian  of  the 
Popes,  should  write  the  following  blasphemous  comment  on  it : 
"  The  Catholic  historian  may  well  be  excused  in  seeing  the  hand  of 
God  in  the  fact  of  three  out  of  the  four  Patriarchs  becoming  at  this 
period  subject  to  the  Saracen.  With  an  ambitious  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  a  mere  puppet  in  the  hands  of  emperors  often  worth- 
less and  tyrannical,  and  with  the  other  three  patriarchs  of  Antioch, 
Alexandria,  and  Jerusalem  also  subject  to  their  sway,  one  cannot  help 
feeling  that,  short  of  this  calamitous  subjugation  of  Christian  bishops 
to  Moslem  Caliphs,  nothing  could  have  checked  the  growing 
pretensions  of  the  Byzantine  emperors  and  patriarchs  in  the 
ecclesiastical  and  spiritual  orders,  or  have  prevented  the  bishop  of 
Constantinople  from  becoming  Universal  Patriarch  in  fact  as  well 
as  in  name.  ...  In  a  word,  as  a  direct  result  of  the  Moslem  con- 
quests, which  can  only  be  described  as  an  'act  of  God,'  the  power  and 


THE  SUCCESSORS  OF  HERACLIUS        277 

The  Emperor  Heraclius  died  in   February  641, 
leaving  the  Empire   in  sore  straits.      He   left  two 
sons,  the  elder  of  whom  had  been  his    colleague, 
and  a  younger  one,  Heraclonas,  by  a  second  wife, 
Martina,    whose    influence    and    counsel    possibly 
explain  the  changed  character  of  the  old  Emperor. 
She  at  once  began  an  intrigue  in  favour  of  her  son, 
and  was  supported  by  Pyrrhus  the  Patriarch  and 
by  the  Monothelites.     Constantine,  the  eldest  son 
of  Heraclius,  was,  according  to  a  doubtful  statement 
of   Zonaras  (a  very  late    authority),   an    opponent 
of   that  view.     The   latter  was    successful    in    the 
struororle  and  mounted  the  throne,  but  died  after  a 
reign  of  only  three  months  and  a  half,  and  it  was 
suspected  he  had  been  poisoned  by  Martina.     The 
issue  now  lay  between   Heraclonas  and  Heraclius 
the  son  of  Constantine,  but  after  a  few  months  the 
party  of  the  latter  prevailed,  and  he  mounted  the 
throne    in    September  642,  at    the  age  of   eleven, 

importance  of  the  Oriental  patriarchs  has  gone  on  decreasing  from 
age  to  age  since  that  period,  till  now  their  names  are  scarcely 
known"  (Mann,  //z'sf.  of  the  Popes,  i.  302).  What  would  St.  Gregory 
have  had  to  say  to  one  of  his  priests  who  should  write  thus  of  his  own 
co-patriarchs,  whom  he  treated  as  equals  and  wrote  to  so  deferentially 
and  kindly.  The  notion  of  attributing  the  fearful  consequences  to 
Christ's  flock  in  half  the  Christian  world  which  ensued  from  the 
Moslem  conquest,  to  the  act  of  God,  is  in  itself  a  shameless  statement. 
It  takes  us  back  to  the  views  of  another  kind  of  God  than  ours  (a  kind  of 
Avatar  of  Shiva)  who  was  supposed  to  delight  in  the  savagery  perpetrated 
by  the  agents  of  Innocent  the  Third  against  the  Albigenses,  by  the 
authors  of  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  or  still  more  keenly  by  the 
blood-bath  filled  by  the  Latin  Crusaders  at  Constantinople  when  the 
latter  were  on  their  way  to  rescue  Jerusalem  from  the  Saracens.  To 
excuse  the  Almighty's  action  as  having  had  in  view  merely  the  pre- 
vention of  one  of  the  Church's  Patriarchs  rather  than  another  be- 
coming dominant  in  the  Church  is  the  ne  plus  ultra  of  bigoted 
wickedness,  and  makes  us  blush  for  our  century. 


278     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

and  took  the  name  of  Constans,  or  more  probably 
Constantine.  He  is  generally  referred  to  as 
Constans  the  Second.  His  stepmother  and  her 
son,  Heracionas,  were  banished ;  the  former  had 
her  tongue  cut  out,  and  the  latter  his  nose  slit, 
which  shows  that  they  were  suspected  of  foul 
play  towards  Constantine.  Their  supporter,  the 
patriarch  Pyrrhus,  fled. 

Let  us  now  turn  from  the  Empire  to  the  Papacy. 
We  have  brought  down  its  story  to  the  death  of 
Boniface  the  Fifth  on  the  25th  October  625.     A 
few  days  later  his  successor  was  duly  nominated. 
This  short  interval  has  been  explained  by  the  his- 
torians of  the  Church  as  probably  due  to  the  fact  that 
Isaac  the  Exarch  was  present  at  Rome  at  the  time  to 
give  the  necessary  sanction  to  the  election  on  behalf 
of  the  Empire.    The  new  Pope  was  called  Honorius, 
and  belonged  to  a  noble  stock — his  father,  Petronius, 
having   been    styled    consul,    which    at    this   time 
would  seem  to  have  been  used  as  a  title  of  honour. 
The  Romans,  in  electing  a  person  of  this  quality, 
probably  thought  they  were  reverting  to  the  great 
days  of  Pope  Gregory.     He  was  clearly  a  person 
of  very  different  quality  to  the  Popes  who  intervened 
between   Pope  Gregory  and  himself,  and  deserves 
a    larger    notice.      He    is    described    by    a    con- 
temporary  (Jonas,    in    his    life    of    St.    Bertulf    of 
Bobbio)    who    had    met   him   at    Rome,   as   sagax 
animo,  vigens   consilio,  doctrina   clarens,    dulcedine 
et   humilitate  pollens}     The    more    official    record 

^  Migne,  P.L.  vol.  Ixxxvii.  p.  1063. 


POPE  HONORIQS  279 

of  his  reign  in  the  Liber  Pontificalis  says  he  did 
many  good  things  {iniilta  bona  fecit),  inter  alia, 
that  he  instructed  his  clergy  (erudivit  cleros). 
These  phrases  are  again  reflected  in  his  epitaph, 
which  shows  the  reputation  he  had  among  his 
contemporaries/ 

His  principal  intervention  in  poHtics  was  on 
behalf  of  the  late  Lombard  King  Adelwald,  who 
had  been  deposed  and  superseded  by  Ariald,  and 
he  reproved  certain  bishops  beyond  the  Po  for 
taking  the  part  of  the  usurper.  In  other  letters 
he  is  found  trying  to  settle  a  schism  which  had 
arisen  at  Aquileia,  appointing  a  new  Patriarch 
there  instead  of  Fortunatus,  who  was  apparently 
a  supporter  of  the  Three  Chapters,  and  protesting 
against  the  interference  of  the  President  of 
Sardinia  with  clerical  discipline  in  that  island ; 
nominating  a  notary  and  a  general  to  Naples  and 
making  business-Hke  arrangements  for  the  adminis- 
tering of  the  papal  lands,  etc. ;  among  other  things 
he  forbade  the  use  of  the  pallium  in  the  streets  or 
in  processions.^ 


^  This  epitaph  is  worth  recording,  for  he  was  a  much-slandered 
man  : — 

"  Sed  bonus  antistes  dux  plebis  Honorius  almus 
Reddidit  ecclesiis  membra  revulsa  piis 
Doctrinis  monitisque  suis  de  faccibus  hostis 
Abstulit  exactis  jam  peritura  modis 
At  tuus  argento  praesul  construxit  opimo 
Ornavitque  fores,  Petre  beate  tibi. 
Tu  modo  coelorum  qua  propter,  janitor  almae 
Fac  tranquillam  tui  tempora  cuncta  greges." 

Rossi,  Inscript.  Christ,  ii.  la,  p.  78. 
2  Labbe,  ed.  1885,  vol.  i.  pp.  224-226. 


2  30    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINFS  MISSION 

In  January  638  there  was  held  the  sixth  council 
of  Toledo,  attended  by  all  the  bishops  subject  to  the 
Visigoths  and  presided  over  by  the  four  Metro- 
politans of  Spain.  At  this  council  a  cruel  edict  was 
passed  supplementing  a  recent  law  which  had  been 
passed,  expelling  all  Jews  from  Spain.  By  this  new 
edict  it  was  provided  that  every  king  on  mounting 
the  throne  was  to  take  an  oath  suppressing  all 
Jews  and  putting  in  force  against  them  all  current 
ordinances  on  pain  of  anathema  and  maranatha 
before  God. 

At  the  same  council  a  letter  was  read  from  Pope 
Honorius  exhorting  the  bishops  to  be  more  zealous 
for  the  faith  and  in  putting  down  the  wicked.^     This 
letter  of  the  Pope  was  replied  to  by  Braulio,  Bishop 
of  Saragossa,  and  there  runs  through  the  latter's 
phrases  a  sarcastic  vein  which  is  remarkable,  and 
perhaps  marks  some  resentment  at  the  intervention 
of  Honorius.      It  begins  by  saying  that  the  Pope 
would  be  fulfilling  the  obligations  of  "  the  chair  given 
him   by  God "  in   the  very  best  way,   when,   with 
holy  solicitude  for  all  the  Churches,  and  with  shining 
light  of  doctrine,  "he  provided  protection  for  the 
Church  and  punished  those  who  divided  the  Lord's 
tunic  with  the  sword  of  the  word."     It  then  goes 
on  to  say  that    the    bishops  of   Spain,  at    the  in- 
stigation of  "their  King"  Chintila,  the  Pope's  most 
clement  son,  were  about  to  assemble  together  when 
the    Pope's    exhortation    that    they    should    do    so 
reached   them.     Thev  thought  the  lano;"uaa"e  used 

1  Jafife,  2038. 


SPANISH  CHURCH  IN  THE  SIXTH  CENTURY   281 

in  the  papal  "  decree"  was  rather  hard  upon  them, 
as  they  had  indeed  not  been  altogether  inactive  in 
the  cause  of  their  duty.  They  therefore  thought 
it  right  to  let  the  Pope  see  what  they  had  accom- 
plished, by  sending  him  the  decrees  of  their  synods, 
so  that  "  his  eminent  apostleship "  {Apostolatus 
vestri  apex)  might  judge  for  himself.  This  they 
did  with  the  veneration  which  they  owed  to  the 
Apostolic  See.  They  knew  that  no  deceit  of  the 
serpent  could  make  any  impression  on  the  Rock  of 
Peter,  resting,  as  it  did,  on  "  the  stability  of  Jesus 
Christ,"  and  hence  they  were  sure  that  that  could 
not  be  true  which  false  and  silly  rumours  had  set 
going,  namely,  that  "  by  the  decrees  "  {oraculis) 
of  the  venerable  Roman  Prince  {Romani  Principis) 
it  had  been  permitted  to  baptized  Jews  to  return 
to  the  superstitions  of  their  religion/  By  the 
bearers  of  this  letter  Chintila  the  King  forwarded 
a  covering  [pallium)  for  the  altar  of  St.  Peter,  on 
which  was  worked  an  inscription  in  the  terms 
following  : — 

"  Discipulis  cunctis  Domini  praelatus  amore, 
Dignus  apostolico  primus  honore  coli 
Sancte,  tuis,  Petre  mentis  haec  munera  supplex 
Chintila  rex  offert,  Pande  salutis  opem.^ 

^  This  letter  is  a  very  remarkable  proof  of  the  attitude  adopted  by 
the  Spanish  Church  towards  the  Pope  in  the  early  seventh  century, 
which  was  so  entirely  contrary  to  what  has  been  argued  by  some 
aggressive  champions  of  its  claims  in  recent  years.  An  attitude  less 
consistent  with  a  belief  in  either  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope  or  his 
infallibility,  at  least  as  regards  Spain,  can  hardly  be  conceived.  We 
shall  see  presently  how  it  was  matched  by  the  Church  in  France. 

^  Mann,  op.  cit.  i.  327,  329  ;  Florez,  Espana  Sagrada,  xxx.  p.  348  ; 
De  Rossi,  Inscript,  ii.  254  ;  Grisar,  Analecta,  i.  87. 


282     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

A  more  far-reaching-  result  was  attained  by  a 
letter  written  by  Honorius  in  the  year  630  to  the 
Scois  {genti  Scottortmi),  described  as  "a  small  com- 
munity living  at  the  ends  of  the  earth,"  urging  that 
they  should  not  think  themselves  wiser  than  the 
ancient  and  modern  churches  of  Christ  throughout 
the  world,  and  maintain  a  computation  of  Easter 
contrary  to  that  sanctioned  by  the  pontifical  synods 
of  the  whole  world  [neve  contra  paschales  co7nptdos, 
et  deer  eta  synodalmrn  totitis  orbis  pontifictmi)} 

In  consequence  of  this  letter  a  Synod  was 
summoned  at  Magh  Lene,  near  Rahan,  in  the 
King's  County,  at  which  it  was  decided  that  the 
Fathers  there  assembled  "  should  go  as  children 
to  learn  the  wish  of  their  parent,"  i.e.  Rome. 
Thither  they  sent  deputies  accordingly,  who,  on 
their  return,  pointed  out  how  the  Roman  practice 
in  regard  to  Easter  was  followed  everywhere.^ 
Whereupon  the  Scots  of  the  south  of  Ireland,  on 
the  admonition  of  the  Bishop  (antistitis)  of  the 
Apostolic  See,  adopted  the  canonical  method  of 
keeping  Easter.^ 

The  most  dramatic  event  in  the  reign  of  Pope 
Honorius  which  has  made  his  name  so  famous  ever 
since,  was  the  part  he  took  in  the  Monothelite 
controversy  which  has  caused  so  much  difficulty 
and  trouble  to  the  champions  of  infallibility.  The 
question  is  too  intricate  to  be  discussed  here,  and  I 
have  remitted  it  to  the  Appendix. 

^  Bede,  ii.  19.  ^  Migne,  P.L.  vol.  Ixxxvii.  p.  969. 

^  Bede,  iii.  3. 


POPE  HONORIUS  AS  A  BUILDER         283 

Meanwhile  I   will  devote  a  few  paragraphs  to 
another  side  of  the  Pope's  career,  in  which  he  was 
very  active  and  did  much  for  the  restoration  of  the 
churches  in  Rome,  and  the  undoing  of  the  terribly 
ruinous    condition    of    the    city,     thus    emulating 
the    policy    and   doings    of    Popes    Damasus    and 
Symmachus.     The    Liber    Pontificalis  contains    a 
long  list  of  his  munificent  acts  in  this  regard  which 
must  have  made  a  considerable  drain  on  the  re- 
sources of  the  Papal  Exchequer.     These  I  propose 
to  enumerate.      He   restored    the   church  furniture 
at  St.   Peter's  and  covered   the  confessio  or  tomb 
of    the    Apostle    there   with    fine   silver   weighing 
187    lbs.       He    covered    with    plates    of    silver, 
weighing    975     lbs.,    the    great    central    door    of 
St.   Peter's   known   as    the  janua   regia    major  or 
mediana,  and   in   later  times  argenlea.     This  was 
doubtless  worked  in  relief,  and  must  have  been  a 
precious  object.     The    dedicatory   poem,   which   is 
extant,  speaks  of  the  figures  of  St.    Peter  and  St. 
Paul  as  occupying  the  centre,  and  says  they  were 
surrounded    with    plates    of    gold    decorated    with 
gems,    while  a   purple   veil    hung    in   front  which, 
when  drawn  aside,  disclosed  the  mosaics  inside.      It 
was  destroyed  and  appropriated  by  the  Saracens 
in  846.     An  inscription  in  which  it  is  referred  to, 
styles  the  Pope  Dux  plcbis,  and  tells  us  he  put  an 
end  to  the  Istrian  schism  in  reg-ard  to  the  Three 
Chapters.^       Honorius   also    presented    two   great 
candelabra  {cereostati),  each  weighing  272  lbs.,  to 

^  Gregorovius,  i.  428,  etc. ;  De  Rossi,  Ins.  Chr.  ii.  la,  p.  78. 


2  84     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

the  same  shrine.  He  further  covered  the  roof  of 
St.  Peter's  with  gilt  bronze  plates.  These  were  re- 
moved from  Hadrian's  temple  of  Venus  and  Rome, 
which  was  that  Emperor's  finest  building  and  the 
greatest  temple  in  ancient  Rome.  These  were  pre- 
sented to  the  Pope  by  the  Emperor  Heraclius. 
At  the  same  time  sixteen  great  beams  were  also 
placed  in  St.  Peter's.  He  further  decorated 
with  silver  plates  the  confessio  in  the  shrine  or 
chapel  of  St.  Andrew,  which  had  been  built  by- 
Pope  Symmachus  near  St.  Peter's,  and  he  similarly 
adorned  the  church  of  St.  Apollinaris  near  the 
Porticus  Palmata  of  the  basilica  of  St.  Peter. 
St.  Apollinaris  of  Antioch,  the  alleged  disciple  of 
St.  Peter,  filled  the  place  at  Ravenna  which  St.  Peter 
did  at  Rome,  and  was  the  patron  saint  of  the  city. 
The  addition  of  the  saint  to  the  Roman  calendar 
by  the  Pope  in  this  latter  instance  was  doubtless 
meant  to  conciliate  the  Exarch  and  the  Archbishop 
of  Ravenna,  to  whose  see  Apollinaris,  it  was  said,  had 
been  appointed  by  St.  Peter.  Honorius  further 
decided  that  every  Sunday  a  laetania  or  proces- 
sion should  proceed  from  this  church  to  that  of 
St.  Peter. 

In  the  Forum,  at  or  near  the  Tria  Fata, 
Honorius  built  the  basilica  of  St.  Hadrian, 
dedicated  to  a  martyr  of  Nicomedia,  who  died 
in  302.  Lanciani  considers  that  it  was  once 
the  ''aula"  of  the  Roman  Senate  (the  Curia), 
transformed     into     a     Christian     basilica.^      This 

^  Giegorovius,  p.  437,  note  28. 


POPE  HONORIUS  AS  A  BUILDER  285 

was  the  second  church  built  in  the  Forum,  the 
first  one  having  been  that  of  SS.  Cosmas  and 
Damian. 

Gregorovius  has  a  graphic  passage  in  regard  to 
this  church.  He  says  :  "A  fire  had  destroyed  the 
Curia  in  the  time  of  Carinus ;  the  palace  had,  how- 
ever, been  rebuilt  by  Diocletian,  and  to  it  belonged 
the  Secritarium  Secretus,  restored  in  412  by 
Epiphanius,  the  City  Prefect.  This  imposing  pile 
of  buildings  still  endured  in  its  main  outlines,  and 
every  Rom.an  was  familiar  with  their  history  and 
significance.  The  ancient  Hall  of  Council  was 
known  in  the  mouths  of  the  people  as  the  Curia  or 
Senatus.  Here  round  the  Altar  of  Victory  had 
been  fought  the  latest  struggle  between  the  old 
and  new  religions,  and  here,  under  the  Gothic 
rule,  the  remnant  of  the  most  revered  institution 
of  the  Empire  had  assembled  in  parliament.  The 
historic  halls  had,  however,  remained  empty  and 
forsaken  for  more  than  fifty  years,  and  successive 
plunderings  had  robbed  them  of  their  costly  decora- 
tions." Hadrian's  basilica  "arose  in  one  of  the 
chambers  of  the  Curia,  and  the  sole  fragment  of  the 
ancient  palace  exists  in  the  church  dedicated  to  the 
Eastern  saint."  ^ 

Honorius  further  restored  the  church  of  the 
Four  Crowned  Saints  on  the  Caslian,  which  had 
existed  as  a  titular  church  in  the  time  of  Gregory 
the  Great.  "The  building  of  Honorius  has  un- 
fortunately  disappeared    in    successive    alterations. 

^  Gregorovius,  op,  cit.  i.  ch.  iv.  3. 


286    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

The  mediaeval  fortress-like  walls,  however,  still 
remain,  and  in  conjunction  with  the  ruins  of  the 
Aqua  Claudia  and  the  massive  circular  church  of 
St.  Stephen,  impart  a  striking  character  to  the 
Cselian  hill."^  Honorius  also  rebuilt  the  church 
of  St.  Severinus,  whose  ruins  were  discovered  in 
1883,  a  mile  and  a  half  from  Tivoli,  and  restored 
the  cemetery  of  SS.  Marcellinus  and  Peter  in  the 
Via  Laricana. 

St.  Lucia  in  Silice,  on  the  Carinae,  says  the 
same  author,  was  so  called  from  a  street  paved  with 
polygonal  blocks  of  basalt.  It  derived  its  name  of 
in  Silice  from  the  fact  that  it  was  made  on  the  site 
of  the  ancient  Clivus  Suburranus,  where  was  situ- 
ated the  temple  of  Juno  Lucina.  It  was  also  called 
Orphea,  from  the  old  fountain  "  Lacus  Orphei " 
mentioned  by  Martial^  close  by.  It  was  rebuilt  by 
Honorius.  He  also  built  the  church  of  St.  Cyriacus 
the  martyr,  seven  miles  from  Rome,  on  the  Ostian 
Way,  where  the  saint  with  his  companions,  Largus, 
Smaragdus,  etc.,  were  burnt.  Fragments  of  it 
alone  remain. 

Honorius  also  rebuilt  from  its  foundations  the 
famous  basilica  of  St.  Agnes,  the  child  martyr, 
whose  story  is  so  naive  and  beautiful.  This  church 
was  built  on  the  family  estate  of  the  Saint  outside 
the  Porta  Nomentana,  three  miles  from  Rome, 
and,  Gregorovius  says,  it  still  remains  essentially  a 
work  of  this  Pope,  and  the  finest  memorial  of  his 
reign.     It    is    situated   far  below  the  level  of  the 

^  Gregorovius,  op.  cit.  i.  p.  431.  -  i.  431  and  432,  note  33. 


POPE  HONORIUS  AS  A  BUILDER  287 

ground,  and  a  descent  of  forty-seven  steps  leads 
to  the  entrance.  "The  basihca  though  small  is 
of  graceful  proportions,  and  does  honour  to  the 
architecture  of  the  period.  It  possesses  two  rows 
of  columns  with  Roman  arches,  one  over  the 
other,  the  higher  forming  an  upper  church.  The 
beautiful  workmanship  and  the  material  of  Phrygian 
marble  prove  the  columns  to  be  the  remains  of  some 
ancient  building."  According  to  the  Liber  Ponti- 
ficalis,  the  Pope  decorated  the  tomb  of  the  saint 
with  silver  weighing  252  lbs.,  and  over  it  he 
placed  a  ciborium  or  tabernacle  of  gilt  bronze  of 
great  size,  and  added  three  dishes  [gavatas)  of  gold, 
each  weighing  a  pound.  This  tabernacle  has 
disappeared,  but  the  mosaics  in  the  tribune  still 
exist,  and  are  figured  by  De  Rossi  in  his  great 
work.  They  form  a  memorial  to  the  Pope  and  a 
witness  to  the  decline  of  art.  "The  figures  re- 
presented are  but  three,  and  notwithstanding  the 
absence  of  individuality  and  life  possess  a  certain 
naive  grace.  In  the  middle  stands  St.  Agnes 
crowned  with  the  nimbus,  an  attenuated  fieure  of 
Byzantine  character,  her  face  devoid  of  light  and 
shade,  and  her  limbs  draped  in  a  richly  embroidered 
Oriental  mantle.  The  hand  of  God  the  Father 
stretches  forth  to  place  the  crown  on  her  head ; 
at  her  feet  lies  the  sword  of  the  executioner  ;  flames 
are  represented  at  each  side.  On  the  right, 
Honorius  presents  her  with  a  model  of  the  basilica  ; 
on  the  left  stands  another  bishop,  either  Symmachus 
or  Sylvester,  holding  a  book.     Each  Pope  wears  a 


288     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

chestnut-brown  planeta  or  chasuble  and  a  white 
palHum,  while  their  shaven  heads  are  uncrowned 
by  any  halo.  The  heads  of  the  two  Popes  are 
modern."  Below  the  mosaics  are  some  ancient 
verses,  "among  the  best  of  their  period,"  says 
Gregorovius,  and  more  artistic  than  the  picture 
which  they  extol.  Some  of  my  readers  may  like 
to  have  a  specimen  of  not  ungraceful  seventh- 
century  Latin.      It  runs  thus  : — 

"  Aurea  concisis  surgit  pictura  metallis, 
Et  complexa  simul  clauditur  ipsa  dies. 
Fontibus  e  niveis  credas  aurora  subire 
Correptas  nubes,  roribus  arva  rigans. 
Vel  qualem  inter  sidera  lucem  proferet  Irim. 
Purpureusque  pavo  ipse  colore  nitens. 
Qui  potuit  noctis,  vel  lucis  reddere  finem 
Martyrum  e  bustis  hinc  reppulit  ille  chaos. 
Sursum  versa  nutu,  quod  cunctis  cernitur  uno. 
Praesul  Honorius  haec  vota  dicata  dedit, 
Vestibus  et  factis  signantur  illius  era, 
Lucet  et  aspectu  lucida  corde  gerens."  ^ 

The  Liber  Pontificalis  attributes  to  Honorius 
the  restoration  of  the  church  of  St.  Pancras,  the 
boy  martyr  who  was  a  contemporary  of  St.  Agnes 
and  who  became  so  popular.  One  of  the  gates 
of  Rome,  the  Aurelian  or  Janiculan  gate,  was 
renamed  after  him,  and  it  was  the  fashion  among 
the  Romans  to  pledge  their  most  solemn  oaths  at 
the  grave  of  St.  Pancras.  I  have  mentioned  how  one 
of  the  earliest  churches  erected  by  St.  Augustine  in 
Enofland  was  dedicated  to  him.  "  Honorius  found 
the  old  basilica  of  St.  Pancras  at  Rome  in  a  state  of 

^  Gregorovius,  i.  432. 


POPE  HONORIUS  289 

decay,  and  restored  it  in  638.  An  inscription  at  the 
foot  of  the  mosaic  sets  forth  the  particulars  of  its 
erection.  The  mosaic,  however,  has  been  destroyed, 
and  in  the  later  transformation  of  the  church  the 
outlines  of  the  earlier  building  have  irretrievably 
perished."^  The  Liber  Pontificalis  tells  us  the 
Pope  decorated  the  tomb  of  the  saint  with  silver 
weighing  120  lbs.,  and  also  gave  the  church  a 
silver  ciborium  weighing  187  lbs.,  with  5  silver 
arches  {arci),  each  weighing  15  lbs.,  and  three 
golden  candlesticks,  each  weighing  a  pound,  etc. 
etc. 

Honorius  also  founded  a  monastery  in  his  own 
house  near  the  Lateran,  in  honour  of  the  Apostles 
Andrew  and  Bartholomew,  which  bore  his  name, 
and  which  he  endowed  with  lands  and  other 
gifts.^  In  the  same  work  we  are  told  that  he 
built  some  mills  near  the  city  walls  close  to  the 
aqueduct  of  Trajan,  which  carried  water  from  the 
Sabbatine  lake  to  the  city.  Gregorovius  adds  that 
this  confirms  the  supposition  that  Belisarius  had 
restored  the  aqueduct  of  Trajan, 

While  this  lordly  list  of  buildings  in  and  near 
Rome  prove  how  active  Honorius  was  in  adorning 
the  ruined  city,  he  was  also  busy  elsewhere  ;  thus 
the  Liber  Pontificalis  tells  us  he  ordained  13  priests, 
II  deacons,  and  81  bishops. 

He  died  on  the  12th  October  638,  and  was 
buried  at  St.  Peter's. 

On  the  death  of  Pope  Honorius  he  was  sue- 

1  Gregorovius,  loc.  cit.  2  _^/^^^  Pontificalis,  Ixxii. 

19 


290    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

ceeded  after  a  considerable  interval  by  Severinus,  a 
Roman,  the  son  of  Labienus  or  Abienus.  Severinus, 
according  to  Jaffe,  was  consecrated  on  28th  May 
640.  It  has  been  argued  that  the  lapse  of  a  year 
and  a  half  which  occurred  between  the  death  of 
Honorius  and  the  consecration  of  his  successor 
was  due  to  the  latter's  hesitation  in  accepting  the 
Ectkesis  which  had  been  put  together  and  adopted 
by  the  Eastern  Church  as  an  eirenicon  with  the 
Monophysites  and  others.  Of  this  I  can  find  no 
direct  evidence. 

The  very  short  career  of  Severinus  was  an 
exceedingly  troubled  one.  During  the  vacancy 
of  the  see,  Maurice,  commander  of  the  troops 
at  Rome,  who  had  no  money  with  which  to  pay 
his  clamorous  and  turbulent  soldiery,  determined 
to  plunder  the  vestiarium  of  the  Lateran  Palace, 
containing  the  various  treasures  presented  by 
the  faithful,  the  funds  put  aside  for  rescuing 
prisoners  and  relieving  the  poor,  and,  as  was 
believed,  large  hoards  accumulated  by  Honorius, 
whose  profuse  expenditure  on  buildings  lent  colour 
to  the  story.  Maurice  made  furious  appeals  to  the 
soldiers  and  the  mob  to  seize  and  divide  these 
treasures.  The  papal  officials  and  servants  de- 
fended their  charge  for  three  days,  when  Maurice 
by  the  advice  of  the  magistrates  put  the  Imperial 
seal  on  the  treasures  and  invited  the  Exarch  Isaac 
to  go  and  take  possession  of  them.  Isaac  went,  drove 
the  principal  clergy  {primates  ecclesiae)  out  of  the 
city,  and  then  proceeded  for  eight  days  to  plunder 


POPE  JOHN  THE  FOURTH  291 

the  famous  palace.  Of  the  proceeds  he  kept  a  part 
for  himself,  sent  a  third  to  the  Emperor,  and  gave 
the  rest  to  the  troops.  He  professed  to  have  gone 
to  Rome  to  sanction  the  appointment  of  Severinus, 
who  was  at  once  consecrated,  but  died  two  months 
and  six  days  later. 

The  Liber  Pontificalis,  from  which  these  facts 
are  gleaned,  tells  us  that  that  Pope  restored  the 
mosaics  on  the  apse  of  St.  Peter's  which  had  decayed. 
He  favoured  the  clergy  and  increased  their  stipends. 
He  was  pious,  gentle,  and  a  lover  of  the  poor. 
The  Liber  Diurnus,  without  giving  any  details, 
merely  names  him  among  the  opponents  of  the 
Monothelites  ;  while  the  Libellus  Synodicus,  which 
has  been  quoted  in  the  same  behalf,  was  not 
written  till  the  end  of  the  ninth  century.  A  much 
greater  authority,  the  Liber  Pontificalis,  says 
nothing  about  it.      He  was  buried  at  St.   Peter's. 

Severinus  was  succeeded  as  Pope  by  John,  a 
native  of  Dalmatia,  whose  father  was  called 
Venantius,  styled  Scholasticus.  Bede  quotes  a 
letter  of  John  written  after  his  election  but  before 
his  consecration  {ciun  adJuic  esset  elechts  in  ponti- 
Jicatunt)  to  the  Scots  in  regard  to  the  time  of 
keeping  Easter,  and  to  Pelagianism,  and  in  which 
he  is  styled  Johannes  diaconus  et  in  Dei  nomine 
electus}  The  future  Pope,  who  was  still  a  deacon, 
writes  conjointly  with  Hilary  the  Archipresbyter, 
John  the  Primicerius,  and  John  the  Consiliarius,  the 
holders  of  which  offices  acted  as  viceregents  during 

^  Bede,  ii.  19. 


292     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

the  interregnum  between  one  Pope  and  another. 
John  was  ordained  25th  December  640.  We  are 
told  he  sent  large  sums  by  Martin  the  Abbot  to 
distribute  among  the  people  of  Dalmatia  and  I  stria 
who  had  suffered  in  the  recent  attacks  of  the 
Slavs.  He  added  a  fourth  oratory  (dedicated  to 
the  martyrs  Venantius,  Anastasius,  Maurus,  etc.)  to 
the  Lateran  Baptistery,  for  which  relics  were  sent 
for  from  Dalmatia  and  I  stria.  Venantius  had  been 
a  bishop  and  was  the  national  saint  of  Dalmatia. 
"  The  still  existing  mosaics  of  the  time  of  John 
the  Fourth,"  says  Gregorovius,  "  in  the  coarseness  of 
their  style  betray  how  far  painting  had  fallen  from 
the  traditions  of  antiquity.  ...  In  this  oratory 
the  apocalyptic  representations  of  the  four  Evan- 
gelists are  enclosed  in  square  frames  on  the  triumphal 
arch  ;  at  each  side  stand  four  saints  ;  in  the  tribune 
is  a  rough  half-length  portrait  of  Christ,  between 
two  angels  and  surrounded  by  clouds.  His  right 
hand  raised.  Below  is  a  series  of  nine  figures. 
The  Virgin,  in  dark  blue  draperies,  in  the  middle, 
with  her  arms  uplifted  in  prayer,  after  the  manner 
of  the  paintings  in  the  Catacombs.  Peter  and  Paul 
stand  one  on  each  side,  the  latter  holding  a  book 
instead  of  the  sword  with  which  later  art  has 
endowed  him ;  Peter  bears  not  only  the  two 
keys,  but  also  the  pilgrim  staff  with  the  cross, 
like  the  aged  Baptist  beside  him.  The  bishops 
Venantius  and  Domnios  follow  ;  on  the  left,  the 
builder  of  the  oratory  carries  the  model  of  a 
church.      On   the  right,   another   figure,    probably 


POPE  THEODORE  293 

Pope  Theodore,   who   finished   the   building,   com- 
pletes the  series.     Three  couplets  are  written  in  one 
line  underneath."^     Pope  John  presented  his  oratory 
with  two  arches  {arci),  each  weighing-  15  lbs.  ;  and 
many  silver  dishes,  etc.      It  will  be  noted  that  in 
the  Liber  Pontijicalis  not  a  word  is  said  about  his 
having  taken  any  steps  in  regard  to  the  Ecthesis 
issued  by  the  Emperor,  or  in  summoning  a  synod  to 
denounce  it,  as  was  afterwards  reported.      No  Acts 
of  such  a  synod  exist,  and  the  statement  depends 
on  Theophanes  (758-817)  who  wrote  more  than  a 
century  later,  and  whose  account  of  the  events  at  this 
time  are  described  as  inaccurate  by  Father  Mann 
himself,   who   quotes   him  in  regard  to  the  synod. 
The  date  itself  is  eight  years  wrong.     The  fact  that 
it  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Liber  Pontijicalis,  which 
is  careful  in  referring  to  such  meetings,  seems  to 
prove  that  no  such  synod  was  ever  held.    The  letters 
that  John  is  alleged  to  have  written  on  the  subject  to 
Heraclius  and  Constantine  are  not  extant,  and  their 
existence  depends  on  the  most  suspicious  authority 
of  Maximus,  whose  career,  as  we  shall  see,  was  a  very 
sinister  one,  notwithstanding  that  he  is  numbered 
among  the  saints,  and  who  is  hardly  likely  to  have 
had  access  to  them  even  if  they  existed,  for  he  was 
2i  persona  ingratissima  at  Constantinople. 

John  the  Fourth  was  buried  at  St.  Peter's  on 
the  14th  October  642. 

Theodore,   who  succeeded  him,  was  a  Greek, 
and  the  son  of  Theodore,  a  bishop  of  Jerusalem. 

^  Gregorovius,  i.  442  and  446,  note  6. 


294    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

The  appointment  of  a  Greek,  and  the  son  of  a 
Greek  bishop,  as  Pope  at  this  time  is  very  curious. 
It  is  no  less  curious  that  he  should  have  been 
accepted  for  the  post  by  the  Emperor,  since  he  was 
strongly  opposed  to  the  Imperial  Edict  known  as 
the  Ectkesis,  and  was  a  close  friend  of  Sophronius 
and  Maximus,  the  two  aggressive  opponents  of 
Monothelism.  Perhaps  his  views  had  hitherto 
been  discreetly  concealed.  He  was  a  lover  of  the 
poor,  says  the  Liber  Poiitificalis,  kindly  towards 
everybody  and  very  charitable.  In  his  time 
Maurice,  who  had  commanded  the  troops  at  Rome, 
and  had  incited  them  to  sack  the  city,  as  we  have 
seen,  rebelled  against  the  patrician  Isaac,  who  was 
then  Exarch  of  Ravenna,  collected  troops  from  all 
sides  and  made  them  swear  that  none  of  them 
would  in  future  obey  Isaac.  The  latter  sent 
Donus,  the  Magister  militum,  and  his  sacellarius 
or  treasurer,  to  Rome  with  an  army,  whereupon  all 
the  judges  and  the  soldiers  who  had  sworn  allegi- 
ance to  Maurice  deserted  him  and  joined  Donus, 
Maurice  fled,  but  was  seized  and  sent  to  Ravenna, 
and  there  decapitated,  and  his  head  was  exhibited 
on  a  stake.  Isaac  soon  after  died,  and  Theodore 
the  patrician  was  appointed  Exarch  in  his  place. 

The  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  Pyrrhus,  had 
apparently  been  implicated  in  the  murder  of  Con- 
stantine,^  and  had  in  consequence  been  expelled 
from  the  city.  Although  he  had  not  been  de- 
posed    canonically,    Paul,     a    strong    Monothelite 

^  Theophanes,  ad  an.  62 1 . 


EMPEROR  CONSTANS  II.  AND  THE  TYPUS     295 

and    supporter    of    the    Edhesis,     was    appointed 
in  his  place.     Meanwhile  Pyrrhus,  doubtless  with 
the    object    of  getting   assistance   in    order   to  re- 
cover   his    Patriarchate    from    the    Latin    Church, 
which    under   the   teaching   of   Maximus    opposed 
Monothelism,  abandoned  his  former  attitude   and 
became   "orthodox"    in   the  sense  in  which  Pope 
Theodore  interpreted  orthodoxy.     Pyrrhus  went  to 
Rome,  where  he  was  effusively  welcomed  and  given 
a  seat  at  the  services  near  the  altar  by  the  Pope, 
who  had  previously  denounced  him  and  had  even 
pressed  the  Emperor  to  take  canonical  proceedings 
against  him.     Thence  he  went  to  Ravenna,  where 
this  "Vicar  of  Bray"  found  it  convenient  to  abjure 
his  recent  alleged  conversion  which  had   brought 
him    the   patronage    of  the    Pope  and  once  more 
affirmed  his  belief  in  "  a  single  will."    According  to 
Theophanes  (a  very  orthodox  person  who  suffered 
greatly   for    the    faith,   but   who    lived    a   hundred 
and  fifty  years  after  these  events),  the  fierce  Pope 
excommunicated  his  recent  friend  in  a  way  which 
was  practised  in  the  East  and  was  therefore  familiar 
to    Theodore.       Standing    by    St.     Peter's    tomb, 
he  dropped  a  portion    of    "Christ's   blood"    from 
the    chalice    into    the    ink,    with   which    he    wrote 
a    sentence    of    excommunication    and    deposition 
against  Pyrrhus  and  his  associates.     This    shock- 
ing  adjunct    to    the    pronouncement   of   anathema 
was      known      to      Theodore's     countrymen     the 

Greeks. 

Pyrrhus  returned  to  Constantinople,  and  even- 


296    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE  S  MISSION 

tually  on  the  death  of  Paul  was  restored  to  his 
Patriarchate. 

Meanwhile  the  figrht  about  the  single  will 
continued,  and  the  Christian  world  was  divided  into 
two  sections — the  Greeks  (who  were  skilled  as  con- 
troversialists), for  the  most  part  under  the  leadership 
of  Paul,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  Sergius, 
Patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  supported  the  single  will ; 
while  the  Latins  both  in  Africa  and  Italy  took  the 
other  side,  which  was  vigorously  championed  by 
the  Pope,  who  had  probably  been  a  disciple  of 
Sophronius,  the  former  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  for 
he  came  from  there.  His  policy  we  can  hardly  doubt 
was  emphasised  by  the  growing  jealousies  between 
the  bishops  of  Old  Rome  and  New  Rome.  To 
the  appeal  of  Theodore,  Paul  replied,  affirming  his 
complete  adherence  to  the  notion  of  a  single  will, 
adding  (what  was  doubtless  very  distasteful  to  the 
Pope)  a  reminder  not  only  of  the  views  of  the 
Fathers,  but  more  especially  of  those  of  his  prede- 
cessor Honorius,  and  Theodore  went  to  the  length 
of  excommunicatinc;'  his  brother  Patriarch  in  regard 
to  an  issue  upon  which  there  never  had  been 
an  authoritative  decision,  and  on  which  his  own 
predecessor  Honorius  agreed  with  Paul. 

Meanwhile  the  Emperor  Constans  made  a 
fresh  effort  to  pacify  the  Christian  world,  which 
was  being  torn  in  twain  by  an  abstract  issue  which 
very  fev/  people  could  even  understand.  Apparently 
at  the  instance  of  Paul,  the  Ecthesis,  which  was 
still  hung  on  the  public  buildings  at  Constantinople, 


THE  rUBLIC  WORKS  OF  POPE  HONORIUS     297 

was  withdrawn,  and  in  its  place  a  fresh  pronounce- 
ment was  issued  known  as  the  Type,  probably 
composed  by  Paul,  in  which  a  perfectly  neutral 
attitude  was  taken.  In  this  document  it  was  ordered 
that  no  one  should  speak  either  of  one  will  or  of  two, 
or  of  one  energy  or  of  two.  The  whole  matter  was 
remitted  to  oblivion,  and  the  condition  of  things 
which  existed  before  the  feud  was  to  be  maintained 
as  it  would  have  been  if  no  dispute  had  arisen.^  In 
case  of  a  bishop  or  clerk,  disobedience  to  the  Edict 
was  to  be  punished  by  deposition,  of  a  monk  by  ex- 
communication, of  a  public  officer  in  civil  or  military 
service  by  loss  of  office,  in  that  of  a  private  person 
of  obscure  position  by  corporal  punishment  and 
banishment  for  life.^  As  Professor  Bury  tersely  says : 
"  The  Type  deemed  the  one  doctrine  at  least  as 
o-ood  as  the  other,  while  the  bigoted  orthodox 
adherents  deemed  the  Laodicean  injunction  of 
neutrality  no  less  to  be  reprobated  than  a  heretical 
injunction  of  Monothelism," 

Amonor  his  works  at  Rome  Theodore  built  the 
Church  of  St.  Valentinus  on  the  Via  Flaminia, 
near  the  Milvian  bridge,  to  which  he  gave  many 
gifts.  It  is  now  destroyed.  He  also  built  the 
oratory  of  St.  Sebastian  in  the  Lateran  Palace, 
and  that  of  St.  Euplus  the  Martyr,  outside  the 
Ostian  Gate,  near  the  pyramid  of  Cestius,  probably 
afterwards  transformed  into  the  church  of  St. 
Salvatore.      He  further  removed  the  bodies  of  the 

^  Bury,  Hisf.  of  the  Later  Roman  Efiipire,  ii.  293. 
^  Mansi,  x.  1029  and  1031. 


298    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

martyrs  Primus  and  Felicianus,  who  had  been 
buried  in  the  Via  Numentana,  and  placed  them  in 
the  church  of  Stephen  the  Proto- Martyr.  To  this 
he  also  made  presents — inter  alia,  three  ^o\A  gavatas 
or  dishes,  a  silver  panel  or  table  to  be  placed  before 
the  "confessio,"  and  two  silver  arches  {arci).  He 
died  on  the  31st  of  May  649,  and  was  buried  at 
St.   Peter's. 

Theodore  was  succeeded  as  Pope  by  Martin 
from  Todi  (Tudertina),  in  Umbria,  a  very  strong 
opponent  of  Monothelism,  who  has  become  famous 
from  the  heroic  tenacity  with  which  he  maintained 
his  views.  It  is  as  difficult  to  understand  how 
Martin  came  to  have  his  appointment  confirmed 
as  it  is  to  explain  the  same  thing  in  the  case  of 
Theodore,  unless  the  authorities  were  indifferent  to 
their  religious  views  so  long  as  they  obeyed  the 
laws  of  the  state.  Muratori's  explanation  is  a 
dangerous  one,  namely,  that  Martin  was,  in  fact, 
consecrated  on  Sunday,  5th  July  649,  without  the 
Imperial  confirmation.  This  is  supported  by  the 
accusations  of  the  Greeks  that  he  secured  the 
Episcopate  irregularite^''  et  sine  lege  episcopatum 
snb fids  set. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  whatever  that  at  this 
time  the  Emperor's  consent  and  confirmation  were 
necessary  to  the  validity  and  legality  of  a  Pope's 
election.  This  very  important  fact  has  been 
forgotten  by  the  champions  of  Martin.  There  was 
another  reason  why  the  Imperial  authorities  should 
resent  the  doings  of  the  Pope  and  his  chief  adviser 


POPE  MARTIN  THE  FIRST  299 

Maximus,  generally  styled  St,  Maximus,  I  will 
describe  it  in  the  words  of  a  quite  recent  Roman 
Catholic  historian  of  the  Church  in  Africa,  Dom  H. 
Leclercq,  who,  speaking  of  Maximus,  quotes  M.  Diehl 
as  follows  :  "  Parmi  les  paroles  en  effet  que  pronon- 
cait  le  moine,  quelques-unes  etaient  singulierement 
graves  :  non  seulement  il  declarait  nettement  aux 
familiers  du  prince  qui  gouvernait  a  Byzance,  que 
proteger  ou  meme  tolerer  I'heresie  etait  un  scandale 
veritable  et  une  offense  a  Dieu  ;  mais  il  lui  arrivait 
de  dire  que,  tant  que  regneraient  Heraclius  et  sa  race, 
le  seigneur  demeurerait  hostile  a  I'empire  romain,^ 
et  on  I'accusait  d'user  de  son  influence  pour  detourner 
de  leur  devoir  d'obeissance  les  fonctionnaires  publics. 
En  tout  cas,  il  entretenait  en  Afrique  le  mecon- 
tentement  qu'avait  cree  le  conflit  religieuse,  et  il 
exasperait  les  tendances  deja  trop  manifestes  a 
resister  au  despotisme  imperial."^  In  plain  words, 
Maximus  preached  and  taught  treason  against  the 
Empire. 

This  was  emphasised  by  the  wording  of  the 
addresses  sent  to  the  Emperor  by  the  provincial 
synods  of  Africa,  of  whose  terms  Dom  Leclercq  says : 
"  Assurement  rien  n  etait  plus  legitime,  mais  rien 
aussi  n'^tait  plus  imprudent."  The  result  was  that 
in  646  the  Exarch  of  Africa,  the  Patrician  Gregory, 
under  the  inspiration  of  these  theologians,  raised  the 
standard  of  rebellion.  "On  sait,"  remarks  the  same 
writer,  "que  Gregoire  ^tait  intimement  \i6  a  I'abbe 
Maxime,  fort  populaire  a  ce  titre  dans  les  Eglises 

'  See  Migne,  F.G.  xc.  col.  iii.  -  Op.  cit.  ii.  303  and  304. 


300    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Africaines  et  dans  le  peuple  a  ce  titre  dans  les  Eglises 
Africaines  et  dans  le  peuple  et  assez  bien  vu  par  le 
pape/  qui  aurait,  a't  on  dit,  fait  mander  a  I'exarque 
qu'il  pouvait  en  surete  de  conscience  se  soulever 
contre  le  basileus  ;  Dieu  lui  meme  approuvant  la  re- 
voke et  lui  assurant  le  succes.  L'Abbe  Maxime, 
qui  dut  etre  pressenti  sur  cette  grave  decision,  fit  un 
reve  d'une  clarte  qui  ne  laissait  rien  a  desirer.  II 
vit  des  choeurs  d'anges  planant  dans  le  ciel  du  cote 
de  rOrient  et  du  Cote  de  I'Occident ;  les  premiers 
criaient  '  Victoire  a  Constantin  Auguste,'  les  autres 
repondaient  '  Victoire  a  Gregoire  Auguste,'  mais 
les  premiers  se  fatiguerent  et  bientot  on  n'entendit 
plus  que  les  voix  qui  acclamaient  le  patrice."  ^ 

Can  it  be  wondered  that  these  two  "saints," 
one  an  irregularly  elected  Pope  who  had  no  legal 
status,  and  the  other  a  fanatical  monk,  who  had 
no  authority  whatever  to  define  dogmas,  who  had 
openly  and  daringly  preached  and  encouraged 
treason,  should,  like  the  leaders  of  the  Pilgrimage 
of  Grace,  or  the  rebels  and  traitors  who  tried  to 
pose  as  martyrs  and  saints  in  Queen  Elizabeth's 
reign,  have  been  visited  with  dire  punishment  by 
the  civil  authorities. 

The  Pope,  without  waiting  for  an  indispensable 
legal  sanction  (which  was  needed  if  he  was  to 
act  de  jure),  and  apparently  under  the  advice  of 
Maximus,  who  was  then  at  Rome,  called  a  synod  of 
105  bishops  at  the  Lateran,  over  all  the  five  regular 
sittings  of  which  he  presided.     The  first  sitting  was 

*  Migne,  P.G.  xc.  col.  in.  ^  Op.  cit.  p.  207. 


POPE  MARTIN  THE  FIRST  301 

held  on  5th  October  649,  This  synod  was  a  purely 
local  Latin  synod,  and  attended  by  only  Italian 
bishops,  and  by  those  from  the  islands,  with  a  few 
from  Africa.  There  were  also  present  many  pres- 
byters and  other  clergy.  At  this  synod  five  prelates 
were  condemned  by  name  as  Monothelites,  namely, 
Theodore  of  Pharan,  Cyrus  of  Alexandria,  Sergius, 
Pyrrhus,  and  Paul  of  Constantinople,  three  of  whom 
were  dead,  one  of  whom,  Paul,  the  Patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople, had  written  to  Pope  Theodore  to  say  he 
followed  the  doctrine  of  Honorius,  and  yet  Honorius 
was  not  apparently  mentioned  at  this  Roman  synod, 
where  the  silence  imposed  by  the  Type  was  so 
much  denounced.  Why  was  not  Martin's  pre- 
decessor named,  and  why  were  the  rest  alone  ana- 
thematised.-* Not  only  were  the  Monothelite  prelates 
anathematised,  but  the  two  pronouncements  of  the 
Emperors,  the  Ecthesis  and  the  Typus,  were  styled 
impious  and  declared  inoperative,  notwithstanding 
that  the  latter  contained  no  decision  on  doctrine,  but 
only  insisted  that  the  burning  question  on  which 
there  had  been  no  authoritative  pronouncement 
should  not  be  publicly  discussed.  The  Popein  signing 
the  Acts  of  the  synod,  which  was  afterwards  known 
as  the  First  Lateran,  claimed  no  dominating  voice, 
and  styled  himself,  "  I,  Martin,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
Bishop  of  the  Holy  and  Apostolic  Church  of  Rome." 
After  the  Council,  however,  he  went  on  to  nominate 
Bishop  John  of  Philadelphia  as  his  vicar  in  the  East, 
and  to  supervise  the  Patriarchates  of  Jerusalem  and 
Antioch,  where  he  had  no  conceivable  right  to  inter- 


302    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

vene,  for  no  General  Council  had  deposed  their  legal 
heads.  What  would  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  have 
said  to  such  a  piece  of  audacity  ?  At  the  Council,  and 
in  subsequent  letters  sent  to  various  churches,  it  was 
urged  (doubtless  in  order  to  conciliate  the  Emperor), 
that  he  had  been  deceived  and  cajoled  by  the 
Exarch  Paul.  This  statement  Constans  speedily 
corrected.  When  he  heard  what  had  happened, 
and  that  a  Pope  whose  appointment  had  not 
received  the  Imperial  sanction  had  summoned  a 
synod  without  his  knowledge  and  approval,  at  which 
an  Imperial  Edict  had  been  spoken  of  in  oppro- 
brious terms  and  denounced,  he  at  once  acted. 
He  sent  the  Chamberlain  Olympius  to  replace 
the  dead  Exarch  at  Ravenna,  with  orders  to  cause 
all  the  clergy  and  "proprietors"  to  sign  the  Type 
and  to  seize  the  Pope.  We  do  not  know  what 
really  happened  in  consequence,  but  Olympius  failed 
to  carry  out  the  Imperial  orders,  and  was  afterwards 
charged  with  makin^  himself  a  treasonable  accom- 
plice  of  the  Pope.  He  took  his  army  away  to  Sicily 
to  oppose  the  Saracens  there,  and  was  killed.  His 
place  as  Exarch  was  taken  by  another  type  of  man, 
namely,  Theodore,  styled  Calliopas,  who  entered 
Rome  with  Theodore  the  Chamberlain  and  an 
army  on  15th  June  653.  He  informed  the  clergy 
who  gathered  round  the  Pope,  that  the  latter  had 
been  illegally  appointed,  that  he  was  not  fit  to 
be  Pope,  and  that  another  would  be  appointed  in 
his  place.  After  some  resistance  Martin  agreed  to 
leave  Rome,  and  asked   that    some    of   his  clergy 


POPE  MARTIN  THE  FIRST  303 

might  accompany  him.  A  few  days  later  he  was 
hurried  away  in  a  boat  to  Portus,  and  thence 
to  Misenum.  Eventually,  after  a  tedious  voyage, 
he  reached  Constantinople  on  the  17th  September 
654,  and  after  three  months'  imprisonment  he  was 
brouofht  before  the  Prsefect  Troilus  to  be  tried. 

Here,  again,  it  was  not  his  views  on  religion  that 
were  charged  against  him,  but  his  political  intrigues. 
He  wished  to  protest  against  the  "  Type  "  being  sent 
to  Rome,  but  was  reminded  by  the  judge  that  it 
was  not  religion,  but  treason,  for  which  he  was  being 
tried.  "We,  too,"  he  added,  "are  Romans  and 
Christians,  and  orthodox."  The  proceedings  were 
conducted  by  the  sacel/arms,  or  Count  of  the 
sacred  patrimony.  The  Emperor  was  sitting  in  an 
adjoining  room  whence  the  latter  came  out  and 
said,  "Thou  hast  fought  against  the  Emperor, 
what  hast  thou  to  hope  ?  Thou  hast  abandoned 
God,  and  He  has  abandoned  thee."  ^  It  is  said  that 
his  life  was  spared  at  the  instance  of  his  old  opponent 
Paul,  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  on  the 
26th  March  655  he  was  exiled  to  Cherson  in  the 
Crimea,  and  there  he  died  on  6th  September  655, 
and  was  buried  in  the  Church  of  the  Viro-in  at 
Blacharnae,  near  Cherson,  now  called  Eupatoria. 
He  was  afterwards  deemed  a  saint  and  martyr,  his 
name-day  being  the  12th  November.  His  relics 
are  said  to  have  been  deposited  in  the  Church  of 
SS.  Sylvester  and  Martin  of  Tours. 

Two  monks  named  Theodosius  and  Theodorus, 

^  Bury,  Hist.  Later  Rom.  Emp.  ii.  295. 


304    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINKS  MISSION 

writincr  about  668,  describe  havinor  seen  the  tomb 
of  St.  Martin  at  Blacharnct,  and  having  been  told 
by  one  of  his  companions  of  the  many  miracles 
performed  there.  They  were  given  some  reHcs  of  him 
among  them, — one  of  the  campagi  or  papal  slippers 
which  I  described  in  the  previous  volume  on 
St.  Gregory.^  In  a  letter  of  Pope  Gregory  the 
Second  (Labbe,  vi.),  mention  is  made  of  the  miracles 
of  healing  performed  at  his  tomb." 

It  has  served  the  purpose  of  later  partisans  to 
try  and  divert  the  issue  to  another  conclusion,  but 
the  facts  are  quite  plain.  As  to  the  story  told 
about  his  cruel  treatment  by  Calliopas  and  his 
soldiers,  it  rests  almost  entirely  on  the  letters  of 
the  Pope  himself,  which  in  such  a  case  are  not 
safe  evidence,  and  of  Anastasius,  who  wrote  a  long 
time  after.  It  will  be  well  to  confront  them  with 
a  much  more  neutral  document.  This  is  how  the 
Liber  Pontificalis,  which  is  otherwise  very  full  about 
St.  Martin,  describes  his  latter  days :  Deinde 
directus  est  ab  imperatore  Theodortis  exarchus, 
qui  cognomento  CaHopas,  ami  Theodoi'imi  iniperiale 
ctibiculariwn,  qui  et  PelbtriJts  dicebatur,  cum 
jussiones.  Et  tollejites  smtctissimuni  Martinum 
Papam  de  Ecclesia  Salvatoris,  qui  et  Constan- 
tiniana  appellatur,  perduxerunt  Constantinopolim ; 
et  nee  sic  eis  adquievit.  Deinde  directtis  est  sepius 
dictus  sanctissinms  vir  in  exilio  {in  loco),  qui  dicitzii' 
Cersona,  et  ibidem,  ttt  dec  placuit  {vitam  finivit)  in 
pace  ChiHsti  Confessor  {et  sepultus  in  basilica  Sanctae 

^  op.  cit.  p.  58.  ^  Mann,  History  of  the  Popes,  i.  403. 


POPE  MARTIN  THE  FIRST  305 

Mariae  semper  virginis.)  Qui  ct  niulta  77iirabilia 
operatur  tisqite  in  hodiernuiii  diem} 

A  few  supplementary  words  are  necessary  about 
another  matter  which  has  been  largely  overlooked. 

In  all  this  story  one  thing  is  perfectly  plain,  and 
in  regard  to  it  the  contemporary  documents  are 
clear.  The  Pope  was  tried  and  deposed,  not  for 
his  religious  views,  but  for  usurping  the  Papacy 
without  getting  the  confirmation  of  the  Emperor, 
and  on  the  charge,  true  or  false,  of  having  intrigued 
against  the  Crown. 

In  one  of  his  letters  Martin  complains  of  the 
treatment  he  had  received  from  the  Roman  clergy 
after  his  condemnation,  which  makes  it  very  pro- 
bable that  they  had  complied  with  the  order  of 
Calliopas,  and  had  actually  deposed  the  Pope  on 
the  ground  of  his  irregular  appointment.  Martin 
dilates  in  his  letter  on  the  want  of  thought  and 
compassion  among  his  old  friends,  who  seemed 
not  to  care  whether  he  was  dead  or  alive,  and 
wonders  most  of  all  at  the  conduct  of  the  clergy  of 
"the  Most  Holy  Church  of  St.  Peter"  for  their  utter 
neglect  of  him.  He  then  proceeds  to  invoke  the 
intercession  of  St.  Peter  to  strengthen  the  faith, 
and  especially,  he  adds,  the  pastor  who  is  said  now  to 
preside  over  them.  This  was  no  doubt  Eugenius 
the  Fourth,  who  occurs  after  him  in  the  list  of 
Popes.  Martin  had  some  time  previously  entered 
a  protest  against  another  being  put  in  his  place, 
which,  he  says,   "had  never  yet  been  done,  and  I 

^  Op.  cit.^  sub  -voce  "  Martinus  I." 
20 


3o6    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

hope  will  never  be  done,  since  in  the  absence  of  the 
Pontiff,  the  archdeacon,  the  arch-presbyter,  and  the 
primicerius  represent  him."  There  can  be  no  doubt 
whatever  that  the  quite  irregularly  elected  Martin 
(styled  saint  and  martyr)  was  superseded  as  Pope  in 
his  own  lifetime  by  Eugenius,  who  must  have  been 
duly  elected  by  the  clergy  and  people  of  Rome 
and  confirmed  by  the  Emperor.  Would  this  have 
happened  if  he  had  been  an  innocent  saint  and 
martyr  ? 

It  thus  came  about  that  for  more  than  a  year 
there  were  two  Popes  living,  one  of  them  who  had 
been  deposed  by  the  Emperor,  largely  on  account 
of  his  irregular  election,  and  the  other  who  had 
been  nominated  by  the  same  Emperor  in  his  place. 
Both  of  them  were  elected,  and  both  consecrated, 
and  both  are  treated  not  only  as  legitimate  Popes, 
but  also  as  saints.  This  is  assuredly  a  very  awk- 
ward condition  of  things.  If  Martin  was  not 
legally  and  canonically  deposed  by  the  joint  action 
of  the  Emperor  and  the  Roman  clergy,  then  his 
successor  was  not  canonically  or  legally  elected,  and 
was  no  Pope  at  all.  If  he  was  legally  and  canoni- 
cally deposed,  because  he  had  never  been  a 
true  Pope,  then  all  the  acts  of  his  papacy, 
including  the  decrees  of  his  Roman  synod,  are 
invalid  and  void.  The  fact  of  Martin's  death 
occurring  after  Eugenius  had  sat  on  the  papal 
throne  for  some  time  would  not  cure  the  irregularity 
of  the  latter's  original  election,  and  of  his  having 
been  up   to  that  time  an  illegitimate  Pope.     The 


MARTIN'S  LETTER  TO  AMANDUS         307 

question  has  become  a  serious  and  important  one, 
since  all  the  real  Popes  have  been  pronounced  to 
be  infallible.  Were  either  of  the  two  Popes,  Martin 
and  his  successor,  legitimate  and  real  Popes  ? 

When  the  synod  was  ended,  Martin  wrote 
letters  to  various  bishops  in  the  Western  world 
informing  them  of  its  decisions.  Among  the  letters 
the  only  ones  which  immediately  interest  us  are 
those  written  to  the  Prankish  bishops. 

In  his  letter  to  Amandus,  Bishop  of  Maestrich, 
in  Austrasia,  known  as  St.  Amandus,  the  Pope  calls 
his  own  synod  concilium  generate ,  which  was  an  entire 
misnomer,  since  it  was  only  a  local  provincial  synod. 
It  also  failed  in  an  essential  factor  of  a  true  council 
at  that  time  in  that  it  had  not  been  summoned  by 
the  Emperor.     The  bishop  had  written  to  Martin 
complaining  of  the  difficulties  of  his  position  and  the 
vices  of  his  clergy,  and  asking  to  be  allowed  to  retire  ; 
he  also  asked  for  some  relics  from  Rome  and  some 
books  from  the  Pope's  library.     The  Pope  in  his 
reply  encouraged  him  to  remain  where  he  was,  and 
to  continue  his  efforts  to  maintain  discipline,  and  he 
also  sent  him  the  Acts,  etc.,  of  the  Roman  synod; 
bade    him    summon  a  synod  of   his    own   for   the 
acceptance  of  its  decrees,  and  asked  him  to  persuade 
the   Austrasian    King   "to   nominate    bishops   who 
might  first  go  to  Rome,  and  thence  pass  on  as  a 
legation  from  the  Pope  to  the  Emperor,  carrying 
with  them  the  assent  of  their  Church  to  the  Lateran 
decrees."     Martin  sent  him  some  relics,  but  in  re- 
gard to  the  books  he  wanted,  he  said  the  library  at 


308    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Rome  was  already  exhausted  and  there  was  no  time 
to  make  copies/  We  are  also  told  by  St.  Audoenus 
(St.  Ouen)  of  Rouen  in  his  life  of  St.  Eligius  of 
Noyon  that  the  Acts  of  Martin's  Roman  Council 
had  also  been  sent  to  Chlovis  the  Second,  King 
of  Neustria  and  Burgundy. 

We  must  now  say  a  few  words  about  the  state 
of  Gaul  at  this  time.  We  have  seen  how  in  613 
Chlothaire  the  Second  reunited  the  Prankish  realm. 
He  was  then  thirty  years  of  age,  and  was  master 
of  the  whole  of  Gaul  from  the  Pyrenees  to  the 
Rhine,  while  the  land  beyond  as  far  as  the  Elbe 
was  tributary.  On  the  loth  October  614,  a  Council 
attended  by  seventy-nine  bishops  met  at  Paris, 
where  certain  important  Acts  were  passed,  which 
were  approved  by  the  King  with  some  notable 
alterations.  It  had  been  proposed  to  enact  that 
the  freedom  of  the  election  of  bishops  from  either 
durance  or  bribery  as  a  condition  of  their  legitimacy 
should  be  affirmed,  but  this  clause  was  struck  out, 
and  in  substitution  it  was  declared  that  if  a  person 
selected  for  a  bishopric  was  worthy  he  was  to  be 
consecrated  by  order  of  the  King,  while  if  any  of  the 
courtiers  were  selected  it  must  be  because  of  his 
personal  merits  or  his  learning.^  The  authority  of 
the  ecclesiastical  courts  was  extended.  The  King 
undertook  not  to  protect  any  clerk  against  his  bishop, 
and  to  respect  the  wills  of  private  persons  in  favour 
of  the  Church.     After  this  Synod,  things  in  Gaul 

^  Ep.'\\.,  D.  of  C.  B.m.Zi^l. 

2  Hist,  de  France^  Lavisse,  ii.  155  and  221. 


DIVISIONS  OF  KINGDOM  OF  CHLOTHAIRE     309 

improved  somewhat.  It  will  be  noted  that  in  the 
Acts  of  this  Paris  Council  there  is  not  the  slightest 
reference  to  Rome.     The  King  was  everywhere. 

Meanwhile,  the  external  political  unity  of  the 
State  really  disguised  differences  incapable  of  lasting 
solidarity.  There  were  three  great  communities 
united  under  Chlothaire  —  Austrasia,  Burgundy, 
and  "Neuster,"  as  it  was  then  called  (it  was 
presently  known  as  Neustria).  Over  each  of  these 
Chlothaire  placed  a  great  officer  of  State  called  a 
Mayor  of  the  Palace  or  Major  Domo.  Landri 
superintended  Neustria,  Radon  Austrasia,  and 
Warnachar  Burgundy.  Meanwhile,  Aquitaine  was 
a  common  prey  of  the  rest,  and  was  ready  to  revolt.^ 

Of  the  three  orgeat  divisions  Austrasia  was  the 
most  restive  and  difficult  to  govern.  It  had  had 
a  sovereign  of  its  own  since  561.  In  623  Chlothaire 
sent  his  young  son,  Dagobert,  to  rule  the  country 
from  the  Ardennes  to  "  the  Faucilles,"  but  neither 
the  prince  nor  his  people  were  satisfied  with  this 
truncated  territory,  and  in  626  Chlothaire  was 
obliged  to  reconstitute  the  ancient  Austrasia  in  all 
its  former  extent,  including  Champagne.  In  the 
name  of  Dagobert  two  remarkable  men  exercised 
jurisdiction — one  of  them,  Pepin,  who  succeeded 
Radon  ;  and  secondly,  Arnulf,  the  Bishop  of  Metz. 
While  still  a  layman  the  latter  married,  and  his  son 
Chlodoald  succeeded  him  in  his  bishopric.  It  was 
in  612  that  Arnulf,  being  then  a  layman,  went 
through  all  the  gamut  of  the  ecclesiastical  orders 

1  lb.  ii.  156. 


3IO    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

in  one  day,  and  thus  slipped  into  the  See  of  Metz. 
It  was  Pepin  and  Arnulf  who,  as  we  saw,  com- 
bined together  and  destroyed  Queen  Brunichildis. 
In  627  Arnulf  retired  into  a  monastery.  He  died 
in  641  and  was  styled  a  Saint.  His  place  was 
taken  as  joint-councillor  of  Dagobert  by  Cunibert, 
Bishop  of  Cologne.  Arnulfs  second  son,  Ansegisl 
(who  later  (when  the  legend  of  Troy  was  revived) 
was  styled  Anchises),  married  a  daughter  of  Pepin. 
She  was  called  in  later  times  Begga,  and  from  them 
sprang  the  Carlovingian  royal  house  of  France. 

In  Burgundy,  after  some  disturbances,  Chlothaire 
granted  the  not  very  tractable  people  an  assembly 
distinct  from  the  Neustrians  and  Austrasians.  In 
627  Warnachar,  the  Mayor  of  the  Palace,  died. 
His  son  Godin  tried  to  usurp  the  position  and  to 
treat  it  as  hereditary,  but  the  King  had  him  put 
to  death ;  whereupon  the  Burgundians  declared 
that  they  needed  no  more  Mayors  of  the  Palace, 
but  preferred  to  be  ruled  directly  by  the  King. 
Chlothaire  died  on  the  i8th  October  629,  and 
was  succeeded  by  his  son  Dagobert  the  First,  to 
whom  we  shall  revert  presently.^ 

The  state  of  the  Church  in  Gaul  was  getting 
worse  daily.  There  was  no  external  control  and 
no  discipline,  and  when  the  great  Church  appoint- 
ments were  not  sold  by  the  kings  they  were  without 
scruple  used  as  prizes  to  reward  the  counts  and 
other  grandees,  who  made  use  of  them  as  sources 
of  power  and  of  income  and  little  else.     The  popular 

^  Hist,  de  France,  ii.  157,  158. 


THE  CHURCH  IN  GAUL  IN  7TH  CENTURY  3  1 1 

election,  instead  of  curing  matters,  only  gave  greater 
influence  to  the  power  of  the  purse.  Thus  in  629 
the  people  of  Cahors  elected  a  powerful  courtier 
named  Didier  as  their  bishop.  He  was  the  brother 
of  the  late  bishop,  who  had  been  assassinated. 
He  himself  had  been  Governor  of  Marseilles  and 
Treasurer  of  the  Palace.  Dagobert  excused  himself 
for  making  this  appointment  on  the  ground  that  it 
was  necessary  to  get  such  a  powerful  person  away 
from  the  Court.  He  nevertheless  continued  his 
intrigues.  Arnulf,  the  Mayor  of  the  Palace  (as  we 
have  seen),  became  Bishop  of  Metz.  Bonitus,  Bishop 
of  Clermont,  had  been  an  official  of  a  Count  of 
Marseilles;  Bodegisl,  Bishopof  Mans,  was  formerly  a 
Mayor  of  the  Palace.  It  will  be  seen  that  in  this 
fashion  the  Episcopate  had  become  very  largely 
laicised,  and  its  members  had  not  the  qualifications  of 
training,  character,  or  learning  suitable  for  such  an 
office,  while  there  was  no  general  control,  discipline, 
or  superintendence  such  as  Pope  Gregory  had  tried 
to  introduce.^  It  is  perfectly  plain  that  the  Church 
in  France  had  become  disintegrated  and  secularised, 
and  had  sunk  to  a  terribly  low  level,  both  morally 
and  mentally.  The  Pope  was  a  mere  distant  figure- 
head, having  no  appreciable  influence  there,  except 
perhaps  at  Aries,  to  whose  bishops,  the  ancient  Vicars 
of  the  Papacy  in  Gaul,  we  still  read  of  occasional 
and  sporadic  missions,  while  it  is  pretty  certain  that 
the  Patrimony  of  St.  Peter,  which  was  limited  to 
the  valley  of  the  Rhone,  still  remained  intact. 

^  lb.  ii.  221. 


3 1 2     THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

In  Spain  things  were  drifting  in  another 
direction.  There  was  no  lack  of  zeal.  In  fact, 
zeal  was  red-hot  and  fiery  there,  and  the  Bishops 
had  become  very  largely  the  arbiters  of  the 
country's  fortunes.  Meanwhile,  the  persecution  of 
the  Jews  was  pursued  with  characteristic  cruelty, 
and  the  crushino-  of  men's  minds  into  one  level 
type  of  orthodoxy  based  upon  dogmas  outside  the 
teaching  of  the  Bible  and  beyond  human  power  to 
decide,  apart  from  the  inspired  Book,  became  the 
rule.  Thus  early  did  Spain  assume  the  role  which 
it  has  pursued  throughout  its  history,  and  which  in 
much  later  times  produced  the  Dominicans  and  the 
Jesuits,  with  their  aims  and  methods,  and  which 
made  schism  in  the  eyes  of  the  Church  the  one 
unpardonable  crime. 

We  carried  the  story  of  the  Visigothic  Kings 
down  to  the  death  of  Sisebut  in  621.^  He  was  the 
first  Visio-othic  sovereio-n  who  was  also  a  man  of 
letters,  and  it  proved  an  almost  unique  accomplish- 
ment among  his  class.  His  correspondence  with 
Csesarius,  the  governor  of  the  Byzantine  posses- 
sions in  the  peninsula,  is  extant.  On  both  sides  it 
is  marked  by  exaggerated  subtleties  and  a  florid 
style.  He  also  wrote  a  life  of  St.  Desiderius, 
Bishop  of  Vienne,  compiled  two  laws,  a  letter 
written  to  the  King  and  Queen  of  the  Lombards 
containing  a  refutation  of  Arianism,  a  letter  written 
to  Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Tarragona,  condemning 
certain    disorders,    a    second    to    Cecilius,    Bishop 

^  Ante^  p.  227. 


SPAIN  AND  ITS  CHURCH  IN  7TH  CENTURY     313 

of  Mentesa,  who  had  retired  to  a  monastery,  and 
who  was  ordered  by  the  King  to  resume  his 
episcopal  functions,  and  lastly  a  letter  to  the 
Monk  Theudila.  He  is  credited  with  having  been 
humane,  and  he  even  conceded  to  the  Jews  one 
year's  respite  during  which  they  must  accept  the 
faith  or  depart.  By  some  he  was  said  to  have 
died  by  poison,  and  by  others  as  the  result  of 
the  ignorance  of  his  doctors.  He  was  succeeded 
momentarily  by  his  infant  son,  who  died  in  a  few 
months,  when  the  line  of  hereditary  rulers  again 
ceased  for  a  while,  and  the  pernicious  system  (in 
practice)  of  an  elective  monarchy  was  again 
introduced. 

Suinthila,  a  relation  of  Sisebut's,  alleged  to  have 
been  the  son  of  Reccared  the  First,  now  occupied 
the  throne.  He  began  by  putting  down  a  revolt  of 
the  Cantabrians  and  Basques,  destroyed  the  last 
slight  foothold  of  the  Emperors  in  Algarve,  and 
was  the  first  Visigoth  who  ruled  over  the  whole  of 
Spain.  He  tried  in  625  once  more  to  re-establish 
the  hereditary  principle  by  associating  his  young 
son  Ricimer,  a  boy  of  seven,  as  ruler  with  himself. 
He  was  much  thwarted  by  his  brother  Geila,  who 
in  631  joined  the  disloyal  governor  of  Septimania, 
Sisenand,  who  with  a  number  of  other  nobles  and 
a  body  of  Prankish  troops  had  risen  in  rebellion 
and  seized  Saragossa.  Thereupon  Suinthila  (who 
thus  proved  his  weak  character)  retired  into  private 
life,  and  Sisenand  succeeded  him.  In  payment  of 
the  P^rankish  contingent  sent  him  by  King  Dagobert, 


314    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

he  presented  the  latter  with  a  wonderful  golden 
cup  weighing  500  pounds,  which  had  been  given 
by  the  Roman  general  y^tius  to  Thorismond.  The 
rare  object  was  viewed  as  a  talisman.  The  bearers 
of  it  were  pursued  by  the  Goths,  who  resented 
parting  with  the  precious  object,  and  the  cup  was 
recovered,  and  a  ransom  of  200,000  golden  solidi, 
equivalent  to  ;^7  2,000,  was  paid  for  it/ 

In  order  better  to  secure  his  position,  Sisenand 
allied  himself  closely  with  the  clergy.  Thus  he 
summoned  a  so-called  Universal,  but  really  a 
National,  Council  at  Toledo  in  633,  attended  by 
sixty-two  bishops  and  presided  over  by  St.  Isidore, 
which  has  already  occupied  us.  To  the  bishops 
there,  Sisenand  was  most  complacent.  He  pros- 
trated himself  before  them,  and  begged  them  in 
tears  to  crave  God's  pity  for  him.  Thereupon  a 
process  was  instituted  against  Suinthila,  accusing 
him  of  rapine  and  other  unnamed  crimes.  He  was 
deprived  of  his  crown  and  all  his  property  save 
that  given  him  by  the  condescension  of  Sisenand. 
His  real  crime  was  having  placed  his  own  infant 
son  on  the  throne,  and  thus  turned  away  from 
the  old  Visigothic  rule  of  electing  their  ruler. 
Suinthila  and  his  property  were  not  the  only 
sacrifices  offered  by  the  obsequious  prelates  to  their 
patron.  At  the  Council  they  proceeded  to  declare 
that  whoever  should  break  his  oath  of  allegiance 
to  Sisenand  (a  usurper !  !),  or  should  do  him  any 

^  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  crown  of  Suinthila  was  one  of 
the  precious  objects  found  at  Guarazar,  and  is  now  preserved  at 
Madrid. 


SPAIN  AND  ITS  CHURCH  IN  7TH  CENTURY     3 1  5 

harm  or  despoil  him  of  his  power,  should  be  deemed 
anathema  before  God  and  the  angels,  and  be  driven 
from   the    Church.     They  then   addressed   him  in 
what    was    more    seemly    language,   and    conjured 
him  and    his    successors    to    rule  with  justice  and 
piety,  and  prayed  that  in   capital  cases  he  should 
not   pass   sentence    until    after    the    voice   of  the 
people  had  been  given  and  the  judges  had  passed 
judgment.     They  further  declared  those  rulers  who 
were  cruel  and  tyrannical  to  be  anathema.     They 
lastly  enacted   that   not   only  Suinthila  but  all  his 
relatives  should    in    future    be   excluded   from  the 
throne.     The  Council  then  proceeded  to  promulgate 
a  symbol    of  the    faith,  to  provide    for  a  uniform 
"Use"  in  chanting  the  Psalms,  in  the  Mass,  and 
in  the  services  of  Matins  and  Vespers  for  all  Spain 
and  for  the  Spanish  outpost  of  Gallia  Narbonensis  ; 
and  decreed  that  every  individual  priest,  deacon, 
clerk,    or   laic    who    had   grievances  should   bring 
them    before    the    annual    synod    of   the    province 
where  he  lived,  which  was  to  meet  on  the  i8th  May 
of  each  year,  at  one  hour  before  sunset,  under  the 
Metropolitan.     After  the  opening  of  such  a  synod 
the  Metropolitan  Archdeacon  was  to  read  out  the 
names   of  the    complainants    in    order.     To    their 
grievances  the  Fathers  were  to  listen  and  then  pass 
judgment,  whereupon  the  royal  delegate  {executor 
regis)  was  to  see  it  carried  out.     These  were  very 
salutary  regulations,  and  show  a  good  sense  which 
we  could  hardly  have  expected  at  that  time. 

At  the  same  Council  a  considerable  number  of 


3i6    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

canons  were  passed.  Among  these  were  laws  en- 
joining on  priests  the  duty  of  chastity,  on  bishops 
that  of  keeping  watch  over  the  civil  tribunals  so  as 
to  prevent  injustice,  and  regulating  the  form  of  the 
tonsure,  and  the  punishment  of  clerics  who  violated 
and  robbed  tombs.  All  free  clerics  were  to  be 
relieved  from  the  payment  of  dues  and  charges. 
A  provision  was  introduced  to  protect  monks 
(who,  it  was  said,  were  worked  like  slaves  by 
the  bishops),  and  to  hinder  the  latter  from  pre- 
venting priests  from  entering  monasteries  if  they 
were  so  disposed ;  while  recreant  monks  who 
escaped  and  got  married  were  to  be  sought  out 
and  made  to  respect  their  vows.  In  future  no 
Jew  was  to  be  forced  to  become  a  Christian. 
Those,  however,  who  had  been  constrained  to 
chang-e  their  faith  and  had  received  the  sacra- 
ments  were  to  remain  Christians,  while  those  who 
had  lapsed  after  becoming  Christians  and  persuaded 
others  to  be  circumcised  were  to  be  forcibly  restored. 
If  the  newly  circumcised  were  the  children  of  such 
recreants  they  were  to  be  separated  from  their 
parents,  and  if  they  were  slaves  they  were  to  be  set 
at  liberty.  This  was  only  a  more  general  applica- 
tion of  the  general  and  cruel  law  which  took  away 
the  children  of  Jews  and  had  them  brought  up 
in  monasteries.  The  property  of  recreant  Jews 
was  taken  away  from  them  and  made  over  to  their 
children.  All  Jews  were  excluded  from  the  public 
service ;  they  were  forbidden  to  hold  Christian 
slaves,  and    if   by  chance    a    Jew    had    married    a 


SPAIN  AND  ITS  CHURCH  IN  7TH  CENTURY     3  1 7 

Christian  he  was  not  permitted  to  convert  her  or 
to  separate  from  her/ 

Sisenand  died  directly  after  the  meeting  of  the 
Council,  on  the  30th  June  636.- 

He  was  succeeded  by  his  brother  Chintila. 
One  of  his  first  acts  was  to  summon  a  fresh  Council. 
This  met  in  640.  The  provinces  of  Seville  and 
Braga  were  not  represented  there.  It  was  chiefly 
occupied  in  providing  safeguards  for  the  throne  and 
establishing  the  royal  authority — a  process  thus 
commented  on  by  the  learned  author  of  an 
admirable  recent  account  of  Christian  Spain, 
M.  Leclercq,  to  whom  I  have  been  much  indebted 
in  my  summary  of  the  doings  in  that  country.  He 
says:  "Voici  done  un  type  acheve  de  Concile 
politique.  II  est  impossible  d'associer  plus  ^troite- 
ment  I'Eglise  a  I'Etat ;  nous  verrons  dans  trois 
quarts  de  siecle  les  fruits  de  cette  politique 
lorsque  devant  Tinvasion  arabe  I'Eglise  partagera 
les  destinies  de  I'Etat."^  We  have  referred  in 
an  earlier  page  to  a  later  Council  held  under  the 
auspices  of  Chintila,  and  to  the  remarkable  corre- 
spondence which  passed  between  its  leaders  and 
Pope  Honorius  as  a  proof  of  the  very  slight  place 
the  authority  of  Rome  had  in  Spain  at  this  time.* 

^  Leclercq,  op.  cit.  298-308.  2  /^_  ^lo. 

^  lb.  312.  *  Ante^  pp.  280-281. 


CHAPTER   VI 

St.  Honorius 

Let  us  now  return  to  England.  Archbishop  Justus 
was  succeeded  by  Honorius  about  the  year  630- 
631/  He  is  described  by  Bede  as  a  man  of  lofty 
erudition  in  things  of  the  Church. 

One  of  the  most  imposing  functions  performed 
by  Paulinus,  who  was  now  the  only  Roman  bishop 
left  in  England,  was  the  consecration  of  Honorius 
as  successor  to  Justus,  early  in  a.d.  631.  This 
ceremony  was  performed  at  Lincoln,^  where 
Paulinus  had  built  a  church  of  stone  which  had 
become  unroofed  in  Bede's  time.  Its  beams  were 
then  exposed,  but,  according  to  Bede,  miracles 
were  continually  occurring  there.  It  was  in  this 
church  that  the  consecration  took  place. 

Meanwhile,  it  will  be  well  to  note  what  was 
going  on  in  East  Anglia. 

On  the  death  of  King  Redwald  he  was  succeeded 
by  his  son  Eorpwald,  who  was  persuaded  by  yEdwin 
of  Northumbria  to  leave  off  idolatrous  supersti- 
tions {relictis  idoloi'um  super stitionibus)  and  to 
adopt   the   faith  and  sacraments  of  Christ.     This 

1  Vide  a?tte,  p.  269.  ^  Bede,  ii.  18. 

318 


SIGEBERHT,  KING  OF  EAST  ANGLIA     319 

must    have    been    after    627,    when    yEdwin    was 
himself   baptized.      Eorpwald    soon  after    received 
the  faith.     According  to  the  very  doubtful  authority 
of  the    English   Chronicle  and  Florence    of  Wor- 
cester he  was  baptized  in  632.^     He  was  killed  by 
a  heathen  named  Ricberct,  and  for  three  years  the 
province   remained   under  error  {in  er^^ore  versata 
est)  until    Sigeberht,    his    half   brother,   succeeded 
him.^     Sigeberht,  says  Bede,  was  a  man  in  every 
way  most  Christian  and  most  learned,  who  during 
his    brother's  life  had   received    the  faith   and   the 
sacraments  while  an  exile  in  Gaul,  and  who  from 
the  outset  of  his  reign  took  steps  to  impart  them 
to  his  whole  province.     This  was  probably  in  the 
earlier  part  of   the   reign   of  Dagobert   the    First, 
when     that     ruler     spent     a     considerable     time 
in    Burgundy    reforming   the    administration    and 
making  easier  the   lot  of  the  poorer  classes.^     It 
was    probably    in    Burgundy    that    Sigeberht    had 
been  living.      Perhaps  he  was  tempted  to  go  there 
by  the  fact  that  it  was  the  centre  of  activity  of  the 
famous    Irishman,    St.    Columban.     The    episcopal 
cities  of  France  had  at  this  time  famous  schools. 
We  have  noticed  how  the    zeal    of   Desiderius  of 
Vienne  in  teaching:  the  classical  authors  was  rebuked 
by  St.  Gregory.     St.  Germanus  praises  St.  Modoald, 

1  The  date  is,  in  fact,  altogether  doubtful.  Dr.  Bright  says  that  by 
tracing  back  twenty-two  years  before  the  year  653,  in  which  Honorius 
died,  we  reach  631  at  the  latest  for  the  coming  of  Felix  (which  followed 
the  accession  of  Sigeberht),  and  must  go  back  some  three  years 
further  for  Eorpwald's  baptism  and  death,  which  Haddan  and  Stubbs 
place  in  628  (iii.  89).     See  Bright,  p.  141,  note  4. 

2  Bede,  ii.  15.  '  See  Fredegar,  ch.  58. 


320    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Bishop  of  Treves,  for  teaching  boys  the  liberal  arts 
{(jui  sagacis  ingenii  cei^neret  puerum,  liberalibus 
Uteris  erudivii).  The  Abbot  Frodobertus  lauds 
the  zeal  of  the  Bishop  of  Troyes  {apud  urbem 
Trecassinam  Pontificis  Ragnesili  scholis  parenhtm 
studeo  77tancipatur).  Leodegar,  Bishop  of  Autun, 
was  taught  by  Dido  of  Poictou  all  the  studies  which 
men  were  wont  to  learn  at  the  time,  and  was  fully 
equipped  {adplene  in  omnibus  disciplinae  lima  est 
politus).  Prsejectus,  Bishop  of  Clermont  (Arvern- 
ensis),  was  taught  letters  in  the  school  of  another 
bishop.^  Guizot  speaks  highly  of  the  episcopal 
schools  which  flourished  at  this  time  at  Poitiers, 
Paris,  Le  Mans,  Bourges,  Clermont,  Vienne,  Chalons, 
Aries,  and  Gap,  which  he  says  superseded  the 
great  civil  schools.^  It  would  have  been  very 
interesting  if  we  could  have  recovered  some  details 
about  the  methods  and  processes  of  this  teaching 
and  of  the  actual  proficiency  of  Sigeberht,  the  first 
of  English  princes  to  be  educated  in  at  all  a  high 
sense,  and  to  know  whether  he  was  in  orders, 
or  merely  a  princely  lay  scholar.  Florence  of 
Worcester  says  that  when  in  Gaul,  Sigeberht 
made  friends  with  Bishop  Felix,  and  that  on 
Eorpwald's  death  they  came  to  England  together.^ 
In  the  life  of  Felix  mentioned  in  Hardy's  Catalogue, 
i.  234,  he  is  made  to  baptize  Sigeberht  when 
in  Gaul.  Bede's  story,  however,  implies  that  they 
came    to    England    separately,    although    it    was 

1  Smith's  Bede,  723. 

2  Civil,  in  Fr.  Lect.  16  ;  Bright,  1 42,  note  2. 
8  M.H.B.  p.  529. 


ST.  FELIX,  BISHOP  OF  DUNWICH         321 

probably  on  Sigeberht's  invitation  that  Felix  was 
induced  to  make  the  journey. 

Felix,  according  to  Bede,  came  from  Burgundy 
where  he  had  been  ordained  (perhaps  only  as 
a  priest).  He  may  have  been  a  protdgd  of 
Columban.  On  his  arrival  in  England  he  went 
to  see  Archbishop  Honorius,  and  asked  his  per- 
mission to  go  and  preach  "  the  Word  of  Life " 
among  the  East  Anglians.  In  one  of  the  lives 
of  Felix  quoted  by  Hardy,^  Honorius  is  made 
to  ordain  him  as  bishop.  This  was  probably  in 
631.^  He  fixed  his  episcopal  see  at  Dumnoc,  now 
Dunwich. 

Dr.  Bright,  speaking  of  it,  says :  *'  Under  the 
Conqueror,  Dunwich,  though  it  had  long  ceased  to 
be  an  episcopal  city,  still  had  236  burgesses  and 
100  poor;  and  it  was  prosperous  under  Henry  iii. 
Spelman  heard  that  it  was  reported  to  have  once 
had  fifty  churches.  When  Camden  published  his 
Britannia^  in  1607,  it  lay  'in  solitude  and  desola- 
tion,' the  greater  part  being  submerged  by  the 
effect  of  the  sea  on  the  soft  cliff  on  which  it 
stood.  One  local  tradition  places  the  first  preach- 
ing of  Felix  at  Seham."  *  A  few  walls  of  the  old 
town  alone  remain. 

At  Dunwich,  Felix,  according  to  Bede  (who 
refers  to  the  happy  omen  of  his  name,  sui  nominis 
sacramentum),  presided  over  the  province  for  seven- 
teen years,  and  was    no    doubt  greatly  helped  by 

^  Cat.  Brit.  Hist.  i.  234-35. 

2  See  the  date  discussed,  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  iii.  89,  note. 
'  i.  448.  *  Bright,  143,  note  i. 

91 


3  22    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

Sigeberht,  who  is  said  by  the  same  author  to  have 
used  great  zeal  after  he  became  king  in  propa- 
gating the  faith/  He  says  of  the  mission  of  Felix 
that  "he  delivered  all  the  province  from  long- 
standing unrighteousness  and  infelicity,  and  as  a 
pious  cultivator  of  the  spiritual  field  he  found 
abundant  fruit  in  a  believing  people."^  He  had 
apparently  been  trained  entirely  in  Gaul,  and 
his  services  and  his  ritual  at  Dunwich  were 
doubtless  taken  from  those  of  Gaul.  They  probably 
did  not  follow  the  Roman  pattern  as  much  as  it  was 
followed  at  Canterbury,  although  it  must  be  under- 
stood that  Felix  was  in  no  way  a  detached  bishop, 
but  had  been  sent  by  Honorius,  and  no  doubt  treated 
the  latter  as  his  Metropolitan.  Bede  ^  tells  us  Felix 
had  a  great  regard  for  St.  Aidan. 

At  this  time  another  foreign  missionary  also 
settled  in  East  Anglia.  This  was  the  Irish  monk 
Furseus,  who  had,  however,  nothing  to  do  directly 
with  Augustine's  mission.^  He  founded  a  monas- 
tery at  Cnobheresburg  (now  called  Burgh  Castle, 
in  Suffolk).  Bede  says  that  Anna,  King  of  East 
Anglia,  and  the  nobility  there  embellished  it  with 
stately  buildings  and  gifts.^ 

Returning  to  Sigeberht,  Bede  tells  us  that, 
desiring  to  imitate  the  good  system  he  had  seen 
in  Gaul,  he  founded  a  school  for  the  instruction  of 
boys  in  letters  {in  qua  piieri  Uteris  ertidirentur),  in 
which  work  he  was  helped  by  Bishop  Felix,  whom 

1  Bede,  ii.  15.  *  lb.  ^  lb.  iii,  25. 

*  lb,  iii.  19.  «  lb. 


ST.  FELIX,  BISHOP  OF  DUNWICH         323 

he  distinctly  says  he  had  received  from  Kent  (de 
Cantia  acceperat),  and  who  supplied  him  with  masters 
and  teachers  after  the  Kentish  pattern  {pedagogos 
ac  7nagistros  j'uxta  morem  Cantuariormn  pi'aebente, 
i.e.  who  had  been  trained  at  Canterbury),^  This 
school,  we  can  hardly  doubt,  was  attached  to  the 
Cathedral  Church  of  Felix  at  Dunwich.  It  will 
be  remembered  that  in  the  long  and  strenuous  fight 
between  Oxford  and  Cambridge  as  to  the  respec- 
tive antiquity  of  the  two  Universities  this  school  of 
Felix  has  been  quoted  on  behalf  of  Cambridge, 
which  is  certainly  more  reasonable  than  an  appeal 
to  King  Alfred  as  the  founder  of  Oxford. 

Sigeberht  after  reigning  for  some  years  deter- 
mined to  retire  from  the  world,  being  the  first 
among  the  Anglo-Saxon  princes  to  become  a 
recluse.  He  entered  a  monastery  which  he  had 
himself  founded  {quod  sibi  fecerat)  and  received  the 
tonsure.  When  the  ruthless  Mercian  ruler  Penda 
invaded  East  Anglia,  Sigeberht  was  withdrawn 
from  his  monastery  and  put  at  the  head  of  their 
forces  by  the  leaders  of  his  old  people,  who  found 
it  impossible,  however,  to  make  head  against  the 
Mercian  chief.  Sigeberht  refused  to  be  armed, 
and  went  into  the  fight  with  a  wand  in  his  hand. 
He  was  killed,  together  with  his  relative  {cognato 
suo — perhaps,  says  Plummer,  his  brother-in-law) 
Ecgric,  who  had  succeeded  to  his  power  when  he 
withdrew  from  the  world.^ 

According-   to    Thomas    of    Elv,    in    his     Vit. 

1  Bede,  iii.  18,  '  lb.  iii.  18. 


324    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINKS  MISSION 

Aedeldriiae,  Sij^eberht's  monastery  was  situated  in 
Bedrichswurde,  afterwards  called  Edmundsbury, 
and  now  Bury  St.  Edmunds.^  No  part  of  this 
early  building  now  remains  at  Bury.  Ecgric  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Anna,  the  son  of  Eni,  Red wald's  brother. 
It  was  during  Anna's  reign  that  Kenwalch,  King 
of  Wessex,  was  driven  from  the  throne  by  the 
Mercian  ruler  Penda,  whose  sister  he  had  divorced. 
He  took  refuge  in  East  Anglia  with  Anna,  with  whom 
he  spent  three  years,  and  there  he  accepted  the 
faith. ^  The  Anglo-Saxon  CJwonicle  MSS.  A  and 
F  say  this  was  in  646.  Florence  of  Worcester  says 
he  was  baptized  by  Felix,  which  is  not  improbable. 
The  Annals  of  Ely  add  that  Anna  was  his  godfather 
(which  is  also  not  unlikely),  and  say  that  he  helped  to 
restore  him  to  his  kingdom,  and  that  it  was  this 
which  drew  on  him  the  vengeance  of  Penda,  which, 
as  Mr.  Plummer  says,^  is  probably  an  inference  from 
Bede.  Anna  was  killed  by  Penda. ^  The  Anglo- 
Saxon  Chronicle  MSS.  A,  B,  and  C  date  his  death 
in  654.  He  was  more  famous  as  the  father  of 
four  saintly  daughters  than  for  his  own  acts.  Bede 
styles  him  a  good  man,  and  happy  in  a  good  and  pious 
offspring  {vir  bonus  et  bona  ac  sanda  sobole  felix).^ 
As  I  have  said,  he  left  four  daughters,  all  of  them 
styled  saint — i,  Sexburga,  wife  of  Erconberht, 
King  of  Kent ;  2,  ^thelberga,  who  became  the 
Abbess  of  Brie,  in  Gaul  {in  Brigenti  monasterio) ; 
3,  ^theldritha,  Queen  of  Northumbria,  and  after- 

^  See  Smith's  Bede,  p.  121,  note  28.  *  Bede^  iii.  7. 

3  lb.  ii.  p.  143.  ''  lb.  iii.  ch,  j8v 

P  Ih.  iii.  7  and  18, 


SAINT  FELIX,  BISHOP  OF  DUNWICH      325 

wards  Abbess  of  Ely  ;  and  4,  Withburga,  a  nun 
in  the  same  monastery.^  Anna  was  succeeded  by 
his  brother  yEthelhere. 

St.  Felix,  as  he  was  afterwards  called,  held 
his  see  for  seventeen  years,^  and  according  to 
Mr.  Plummer  must  have  died  in  647  (as  stated 
by  Florence  of  Worcester  ^)  or  in  648.  Capgrave, 
A7ig.  Sac.  i.  403,  puts  his  obit  on  8th  March.  He 
was  buried  first  at  Dunwich,  thence  he  was  trans- 
lated to  Seham,  near  Ely  (now  Soham) — "a  town," 
says  William  of  Malmesbury,  "planted  near  the 
marsh  which  in  former  times  had  to  be  traversed  by  a 
dangerous  route  in  a  boat,  but  can  now  be  gone  over 
on  foot."  The  church  there  was  destroyed  by  the 
Danes,  but  Malmesbury  adds  that  remains  of  it  still 
survived,  and  among  them  was  found  the  body  of 
St.  Felix,  which  was  removed  to  Ramsey  Abbey/ 

Several  places  still  claim  his  memory,  such  as 
Felixstowe,  south-east  of  Ipswich,  in  Suffolk,  and 
Feliskirk,  near  Thirsk,  in  Yorkshire.  On  the  death 
of  Felix,  Archbishop  Honorius  consecrated  Thomas 
his  deacon  {diacomun  ejrts)  to  the  see.  He  was  a 
native  of  the  Province  of  the  Gyrwas  [P?'ovincia 
Gyrwiorum).  In  the  Anglo-Saxon  version  of  Bede 
the  words  are  translated  by  "  Gyrwa  maegdh," 
the  kindred  of  the  Gyrwas.  The  Liber  Eliensis 
describes  the  Gyrwas  as  "all  the  Southern  Angles 
living  in  the  great  marsh  in  which  is  situated  the 

^  Florence  of  Worcester,  Appendix,  M.H.B.  636. 
2  Bede,  ii.  15,  iii.  20.  3  M.H.B.  p.  530. 

*■  William  of  Malmesbury,  Gest.  Pont.  pp.  147  and  348.     Lib.  El. 
pp.  21  and  22.     Plummer,  vol.  ii.  p.  174. 


326    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Isle  of  Ely."^  Thomas  died  five  years  later,  prob- 
ably in  652  or  653,  whereupon  Honorius  con- 
secrated Berctgils,  whose  name  in  religion  was 
Boniface,  and  who  was  a  Kentish  man,  in  his 
place." 

Let  us  now  turn  to  Northumbria. 

"When,"  says  Bede,  "  ^dwin  had  reigned 
gloriously  over  Anglians  and  Britons  alike  for 
seventeen  years,  during  six  of  which  he  had  been 
a  Christian,  Caedwalla,  King  of  the  Britons,  in 
alliance  with  Penda,  a  very  vigorous  man  of  the 
royal  family  of  Mercia,  and  a  pagan,  rebelled  against 
him."  A  fierce  battle  took  place  at  Haethfelth 
(probably  Hatfield  Chase,  near  Doncaster),  and 
y^dwin  was  there  killed.  This  fateful  battle  was 
fought  on  the  12th  October  633,^  when  ^dwin 
was  forty-eight  years  old.  His  son  Osfrid  and 
his  whole  army  were  either  killed  or  scattered. 
His  other  son,  Eadfrid,  who  fled  for  refuge 
to  Penda,  was  put  to  death  by  him  in  spite 
of  his  oath  to  the  contrary.*  We  may  be 
certain  that  the  upheaval  which  led  to  this  catas- 
trophe was  largely  caused  by  the  dislike  of  many 
of  his  people  to  /Edwin's  change  of  faith,  and  to 
the  fact  that  a  very  large  number  of  them  had 
remained  pagans.  Mr.  Green  has  well  expressed 
the  actual  results  of  this  rapid  change  of  religion, 

^  Plummer,  Bede^  vol.  ii.  p.  174.  -Bede,  iii.  20. 

^  The  Chronicle  attached  to  Nennius  dates  the  battle  in  630,  and 
Tighernac  in  631.  Tighernac,  however,  dates  Anglian  events  two  or 
three  years  before  Bede  (Skene,  Celtic  Scotland^  i.  243,  note  25). 

*  Bede,  ii.  20. 


DEATH   OF  KING  ^DWIN  327 

perhaps  intensified  by  the  indecency  with  which 
the  Archpriest  Coifi  had  treated  his  late  gods.  He 
says  :  "  Easily  as  it  was  brought  about  in  /Edwin's 
court,  the  religious  revolution  gave  a  shock  to  the 
power  which  he  had  built  up  in  Britain  at  large. 
Though  Paulinus  preached  among  the  Cheviots 
as  on  the  Swale,  it  was  only  in  Deira  that  the 
Northumbrians  really  followed  the  bidding  of  their 
King.  If  .^dwin  reared  anew  a  church  at  York, 
no  church  or  altar  rose  in  Bernicia  from  the  Forth 
to  the  Tees."^  In  addition  to  the  cause  here  as- 
signed for  the  increase  in  v^idwin's  enemies,  we  may 
also  conjecture  that  Caedwalla's  fierce  and  cruel 
devastation  of  Northumbria  had  been  inspired  by 
the  merciless  way  he  had  been  driven  hither  and 
thither,  and  also  by  the  British  clergy,  who  could 
not  have  for^rotten  the  slaughter  of  the  monks  at 
Bangor,  and  the  ruthlessness  of  ^thelfred.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  exiled  family  of  yE^thelfred 
may  also  have  had  a  hand  in  the  matter. 

Kino;  Edwin's  head  was  taken  to  York,  and 
was  afterwards  removed  to  the  Church  of  St.  Peter 
there,  the  church  he  had  himself  begun,  and  which 
was  completed  by  St.  Oswald.  It  was  placed  in 
the  Chapel  [in  porticu)  of  "  St.  Gregory  the  Pope, 
from  whose  disciples  he  had  received  the  Word 
of  Life.  "2 

Things  in  Northumbria  now  went  hard  with  the 
Christians,  who  were  cruelly  trampled  upon,  and 
i^dwin's  immediate  successors  relapsed  into  pagan- 

^  Green,  The  Making  of  England,  264.  -  Bede,  ii.  20. 


328    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE^S  MISSION 

ism.  "All  was  lost,"  says  Bishop  Browne.  "A 
day's  preaching  had  converted  hundreds.  A  day's 
defeat  swept  the  whole  thing  away.  Christianity 
in  the  North  was  gone."  ^  This  is  not  quite 
accurate.  When  Paulinus  abandoned  his  flock  and 
his  great  mission  in  Northumbria,  he  left  behind 
him  his  faithful  deacon  James,  "a  man,"  says  Bede, 
"who  was  both  an  ecclesiastic  and  a  saint,"  and 
who  for  a  long  time  after,  remained  in  the  Church, 
and  plucked  much  prey  from  the  old  enemy 
{antiquo  hosti)  by  teaching  and  baptizing.  "  The 
village,"  says  Bede,  "where  he  chiefly  worked, 
situated  near  Catterick  (jtixta  Cataractam),  still 
bears  his  name."^  Bishop  Browne  says  the  place  is 
now  called  Aikbar  or  Akebar,  of  which  name,  he 
argues,  the  first  syllable  represents  Jacobus,  and  not 
Oak,  as  has  been  thought  by  some.^  The  cross  of  St. 
James  is  still  to  be  seen  at  Hawkswell,  five  miles  from 
Catterick.*  Bishop  Browne  says  of  it :  "  The  shaft  is 
about  four  feet  high  above  ground,  and  it  is  covered 
with  simple  but  unusual  interlacing  patterns,  cut  in 
relief,  and  of  the  type  so  well  known  to  those  who  have 
studied  the  curious  and  beautiful  remains  of  Anglian 
art  in  the  north  of  England."  The  commencement 
of  the  spring  of  the  cross-head  can  be  seen  at  the 
upper  part  of  the  shaft.  There  is  on  the  front  of 
the  shaft  a  small  rectangular  panel  with  raised 
border,  and  Hubner  gives  as  the  inscription 
on    it,   Haec    est    crux    sci    Gacobi.     A    figure    of 

^  Augustine  and  his  Companions,  i86.  ^  Op.  cit.  ii.  20. 

^  Conv.  of  the  Heptarchy,  pp.  218-222.  ■*  lb.  pp.  215  f. 


The  Inscribed  Cross  at  Hawkswell,  near  Catterick. 

To  face  p.  328. 


THE  CANTOR  JAMES  329 

the  cross  is  given  by  Bishop  Browne.  Near  it 
is  St.  Andrew's  Church,  dedicated  to  the  patron 
of  Paulinus'  monastery  at  Rome.  Bede  says  that, 
being  highly  skilled  in  the  art  of  singing  in  church, 
when  peace  was  afterwards  restored  in  the  pro- 
vince, and  the  number  of  believers  grew,  he  became 
the  master  of  the  ecclesiastical  chanting  after  the 
fashion  of  the  Romans  and  Kentish  men  {^Qui 
quoniam  cantandi  m  ecclesia  erat  periiissimtis,  .  .  . 
etiani  magister  ecclesiasticae  cantionis  juxta  morent 
Romanorum  sive  Cantuariortmi  multis  coepit  ex- 
iste7'e);  "and  being  old  and  full  of  days,  as  the 
Scriptures  say,  he  followed  the  way  of  his  fathers."  ^ 
Bede  says  in  another  place  that  he  survived  to  his 
own  day."  The  latter,  a  famous  Northumbrian 
himself,  probably  exaggerates  the  influence  of  James, 
who,  however  excellent,  can  only  have  shed  a  very 
local  and  small  light  "  amidst  the  encircling  gloom  " 
in  Northumbria  at  the  time. 

The  terrible  desolation  of  Northumbria  after 
Edwin's  death  left  litde  temptation  to  Paulinus 
to  remain  behind,  for  he  was  apparently  not  made 
of  the  same  stuff  as  martyrs  are  made ;  and, 
perhaps,  as  has  been  suggested,  he  felt  some 
obligation  to  see  the  Queen,  whose  chaplain  he  had 
been,  escorted  to  a  place  of  safety.  This  might 
excuse  his  making  a  journey  to  Kent,  but  hardly 
justified  his  complete  and  final  abandonment  of  his 
missionary  Church  and  of  the  converts  he  had  made. 
He    accordingly  set  out   by  sea  for    Kent,  taking 

^  Bede,  ii.  20.  ^  lb.  ii.  16. 


330    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

with  him  his  protege,  Queen  yEthelberga,  whom 
he  had  originally  escorted  to  Northumbria.  Bede 
says  they  were  very  honourably  received  by  Arch- 
bishop Honorius  [ab  Honorio  archiepiscopd)  and 
by  King  Eadbald/  who  was  of  course  her  half- 
brother. 

When  .Edwin's  widow,  y^thelberga,  returned 
to  her  old  Kentish  home,  she,  according  to  Thomas 
of  Elmham,  founded  the  Monastery  of  Lyminge, 
in  Kent,  in  the  town  of  the  same  name.  The 
place  of  her  burial  is  still  marked  by  a  wooden 
tablet  on  the  south  wall  of  the  church  there, 
and  her  name  of  endearment  is  still  perpetuated 
in  a  neiCThbourino-  common  called  Tatta's  lea, 
while  "  St.  ^thelberga's  Well  is  situated  to 
the  east  of  the  church."^  This  was  the  first 
nunnery  recorded  to  have  been  founded  among 
the  Saxons  or  Anglians.  It  was  probably  based 
on  the  type  of  those  in  Gaul,  for  she  was  a  friend 
of  Kino-  Dag"obert's.^ 

My  friend  Mr.  Peers  has  given  a  graphic  account 
of  the  vicissitudes  of  the  early  church  at  Lyminge, 
which  I  will  take  the  liberty  of  quoting.  After 
reporting  how  ^thelberga  received  a  gift  of  the 
royal  vill  of  Lyminge  from  her  brother,  the  Kentish 
King,  and  how  she  died  in  647  in  the  monastery 
she  had  founded  there,  and  was  there  interred,  as 
was  also  presently  her  great-great-niece  St.  Mildred, 
he  proceeds:   "The  monastery  was  raided  by  the 

^  Op.  cit.  ii.  20.  *  Bright,  149. 

'  Vide  infra,  p.  333. 


THE  SAXON  CHURCH  AT  LYMINGE      331 

Danes,  but,  as  at  Rochester,  the  church  can  only 
have  been  partially  destroyed,  for  in  1085  Lanfranc, 
requiring  relics  for  his  new  foundation  in  Canterbury, 
St.  Gregory's,  caused  the  bodies  of  the  two  saints 
to  be  translated  from  the  norih  por^icus  of  Lyminge 
Church  to  the  Church  of  St.  Gregory,  and  thereby 
started  the  great  and  long-lived  squabble  between 
the  monks  of  St.  Augustine's  at  Canterbury  and  the 
canons  of  St.  Gregory's  as  to  which  house  possessed 
the  authentic  relics  of  St.  Mildred,  the  details  of 
which  may  be  read  in  the  polemical  tract  of  Gocelin, 
monk  of  St.  Augustine's,  entitled  '  Contra  inanes 
beatae  Mildrethae  usurpatores,'  written  about  1098.^ 
Gocelin,  who  seems  to  have  been  present  at  the 
removal  of  the  relics,  speaks  of  ..^^ithelberga's  tomb 
as  still  existing  :  '  eminentms  monwncnhtni  .  .  .  in 
aquilonali  porticii  ad  australem  parietetn  ecclesiae 
arcu  invohitum' ',  and  again,  speaking  of  yEthelberga 
says :  *  Cujtis  m  limingis  eminentms  et  migustius 
creditur  monumentum.''  The  position  of  the  tomb, 
in  an  arched  recess  in  the  north  porticus,  against 
or  near  the  south  wall  of  the  church,  is  not  clear, 
unless  the  north  porch  and  the  south  wall  are 
understood  as  belonging  to  two  different  buildings. 
This  would,  at  Lyminge,  fit  the  case  very  well,  as 
the  present  church  is  built  just  to  the  north  of  the 
old  foundation,  so  that  a  north  porticus  of  the  older 
church  could  very  well  abut  on  the  south  wall  of  the 
later  one.  Canon  Jenkins  claims  to  have  discovered 
the  site  of  both  grave  and  porticus  in  the  north  wall 

1  Cott.  MS.,  Br.  Mus.,  Vesp.  B.  xx.  f.  260. 


332    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

of  the  apse,  just  to  the  east  of  the  triple  arcade,  but 
the  evidence  is  inconclusive,  and  points  rather  to  a 
later  interment."^ 

In  regard  to  the  remains  of  St.  ^thelberga's 
church,  Mr.  Micklethwaite  says  its  foundations  are 
situated  in  the  present  churchyard  south  of  the  exist- 
inof  church,  and  show  that  it  was  of  the  same  form 
as  that  of  St.  Pancras  at  Canterbury,  but  smaller, 
and  was  without  any  porches  or  external  chapels.  It 
had  an  arcade  of  three  instead  of  a  single  sanctuary 
arch.^  Mr.  Peers  adds  that  there  is  nothing  left 
of  the  church  but  the  lowest  foundations  of  the 
walls,  which  are  i  foot  lo  inches  thick,  of  Roman 
materials,  with  good  evidence  of  a  triple  arcade.  No 
trace  of  ih^porticus  remains  in  which  St.  ^thelberga 
and  St.  Mildred  lay,  and  which  seems  to  have  been 
standing  at  the  end  of  the  eleventh  century.  Traces 
of  Roman  buildings  abound  on  the  site,  and  a  Roman 
foundation  underlies  the  western  end  of  the  nave.^ 

Meanwhile,  Bass,  a  King's  thane,  conducted 
another  party,  which  included  y^dwin's  daughter 
Eanfleda  and  his  son  Vuscfrean,  together  with 
Yffi,  his  grandson,  the  son  of  Osfrid,  to  Kent, 
.^thelberga  presently  had  misgivings  as  to  the 
intentions  of  Eadbald  and  Oswald  towards  these 
dangerous  young  people.  The  mention  of  Oswald  is 
specially  ominous.  He  had  interests  in  the  north 
which  the  existence  of  the  young  princes  threatened. 
She  accordingly  sent   them   to  be   brought   up   in 

1  Arch.  Jou7'?i.,  1901,  p.  407.  2  lb..,  1896,  pp.  313  and  314. 

^  lb..,  1901,  pp.  419  and  420. 


BASS  ESCORTS  EDWIN'S  FAMILY  TO  KENT     333 

France,  to  King  Dagobert,  who,  says  Bede,  was 
a  friend  of  hers.  There  they  all  died  in  infancy 
and  were  honourably  buried  in  the  church.  There 
is  a  sinister  sound  about  this  part  of  the  narrative. 
When  he  went  to  Kent,  Bass  also  took  with  him 
the  precious  vessels,  including  a  great  golden 
cross  and  a  golden  chalice  which  ^dwin  had 
given  for  the  service  of  the  church,  and  which 
Bede  says  were  still  preserved  at  Canterbury  in 
his  day.^ 

At  this  time  there  was  a  vacancy  in  the  see 
of  Rochester.  Its  bishop,  Romanus,  who  had  been 
sent  on  an  embassy  to  Rome  by  the  archbishop 
(perhaps  in  order  to  secure  himself  a  pallium), 
was  drowned  in  the  Mediterranean.  Whereupon, 
at  the  invitation  of  Honorius  the  archbishop 
{antistes)  and  of  King  Eadbald,  Paulinus  (who 
was  at  the  time  without  a  see)  took  charge  of 
his  church.^ 

After  his  return  to  the  faith,  Eadbald,  the  Kentish 
King,  apparently  provedhimselfazealous  churchman. 
For  example,  we  are  told  in  the  life  of  his  daughter, 
St.  Eanswitha,  that  he  built  a  church  at  Folkestone 
dedicated  to  St.  Peter.  Eanswitha  refused  to  marry 
and  became  a  nun  and  abbess  of  a  nunnery  there, 
which  was  also  probably  founded  by  her  father.^ 
We  have  seen  how  he  built  the  small  Church  of  the 
Virgin,  in  the  precincts  of  St.  Augustine's  Abbey, 
which  was  consecrated  by  Archbishop  Mellitus.      It 

1  Bede,  ii.  20.  2  /^^ 

'  See  Hardy,  Catalogue,  i.  pp.  2?8  and  229. 


334    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

is  probable  that  he  granted  lands  and  benefactions 
to  the  Church,  but  the  charters  associated  with 
his  name  are  forgeries/ 

Thomas  of  Elmham  tells  us  that  Gratiosus,  the 
fourth  abbot  of  the  Monastery  of  St.  Peter  and 
St.  Paul  at  Canterbury,  died  in  638,  and  was 
succeeded  after  an  interval  of  two  years  by 
Petronius,   a  Roman. ^ 

King  Eadbald  died  in  the  year  640.  He 
was  succeeded  by  his  son  Earconberht.  Bede 
makes  him  the  only  son  of  Eadbald.  A  second 
son,  Eormenred,  is  mentioned  in  an  inter- 
polated passage  in  Codex  A  of  the  Chronicle, 
S2tb  an.  640.  The  notice  perhaps  came  from 
Florence  of  Worcester.^  Eormenred  apparently 
died  before  his  father,  and,  by  his  wife  Oslava, 
left  two  sons  and  four  daughters.'*  Earconberht, 
according  to  Bede,  was  the  first  of  the  English 
Kings  who  insisted  on  the  pagan  idols  being- 
forsaken  and  destroyed  throughout  his  kingdom. 
He  also  caused  the  forty  days  of  Lent  to  be 
observed,  and  issued  instructions  that  any  one 
who  failed  to  obey  these  orders  was  to  be  visited 
with  condign  punishment.^ 

Paulinus  remained  Bishop  of  Rochester  until 
his  death,  which  took  place  on  the  6th  of  the  ides 
of  October  (i.e.  loth  October)  644,  having  been 
bishop  nineteen  years,  two  months,  and  twenty-one 
days.      In  this  calculation  Bede  includes  the  whole 

^  See  Introduction.  ^  Op.  cit.  175. 

3  See  M.H.B.  627  and  635. 

*  Florence  of  Worcester,  M.H.B.  635,  *  Bede^  iii.  8. 


PAULINUS  AT  ROCHESTER  335 

length  of  his  episcopate.  Of  these  years  eight  were 
spent  at  York  and  eleven  at  Rochester.^  In  the 
Life  of  St.  Gregory  by  the  Whitby  Monk,  we  are 
told  the  soul  of  Paulinus  was  seen  on  his  death 
to  fly  to  heaven  in  the  form  of  a  white  swan.- 
He  was  buried  in  the  sacristy  [in  secretario)  of 
St.  Andrew's  Cathedral.^  He  is  said  to  have  left 
the  cope  which  the  Pope  had  sent  him  to  that 
church.^  In  Bishop  Gundulf's  days  the  old  church 
was  destroyed  and  rebuilt  by  Lanfranc,  when  his 
bones  were  put  in  a  casket  {in  scrinio)  and  trans- 
ferred to  the  new  building.  This  translation  took 
place  on  the  4th  of  the  ides  of  January,  which  was 
a  day  solemnly  kept  at  Rochester.^ 

In  his  place  Archbishop  Honorius  ordained 
Ithamar,  who,  says  Bede,  was  sprung  from  the 
people  of  Kent,  and  was  distinguished  in  life  and 
learning.^  He  was  apparently  the  first  Englishman 
to  be  made  a  bishop,  and  retained  his  old  English 
name. 

Archbishop  Honorius  himself  died  on  the  last 
day  of  September  (ist  kalends  of  October),  653.^ 
Elmham  gives  his  epitaph  : — 

"Quintus  honor  memori  versu  niemoraris,  Honori, 
Digne  sepultura,  quam  non  teret  ulla  litura. 
Ardet  in  obscuro  tua  lux  vibramine  puro : 
Haec  scelus  omne  premit,  fugat  umbras,  nubila  demit."  ^ 

^  See  Smith's  Bede,  iii.  14,  note  13.  2  Qp^  ^/^_  p^j._  jy_ 

'  Bede,  iii.  14.  *  lb.  ii.  20. 

5  Smith,  op.  cit.  note  14.  "  Bede,  iii.  14. 

"^  lb.  iii.  20.     His  life  is  given  in  the  Acta  Sand.  vii.  698-711, 
»  Op.  cit.  183. 


336    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

Deusdedit 

On  the  death  of  Honorius  the  see  was  vacant 
for  a  year  and  a  half,  when  Deusdedit,  a  native  of 
Wessex,  whose  real  name,  according  to  Elmham,^ 
was  Frithonas,^  and  who  was  probably  a  monk,  was 
elected  in  his  place.  He  possibly  took  his  name 
in  religion  from  Pope  Deusdedit.  Ithamar  came 
from  Rochester  to  consecrate  him,  which  was  again 
an  instance  of  a  single  bishop,  and  one  too  who 
had  not  received  the  pall,  consecrating  another. 
He  was  ordained  on  26th  March,  or  perhaps  12th 
December  654,^  and  was  the  first  archbishop  of 
English  birth.  He  ruled  the  diocese  for  nine  years, 
four  months,  and  two  days.*  During  his  episcopate 
he  consecrated  Damian  as  Bishop  of  Rochester,  as 
the  successor  to  Ithamar,  on  the  death  of  the  latter. 
Damian  came  from  Sussex.  We  do  not  know  when 
he  died,  but  it  was  probably  some  time  before 
Deusdedit,  for,  according  to  Bede,^  the  see  of 
Rochester  had  long  been  vacant  through  the  death 
of  Damian  on  the  arrival  of  Theodore  at  Canterbury. 
Bede  tells  us  that  in  the  year  of  the  eclipse  and 

1  Pp.  192  and  193. 

^  Elmham  says  :  '■''patria  lingua  priniitus  Fritonas  vocabatur ; 
sed  propter  dona  gratuita,  quae  sui's  meritis  77tultiplicibus  consona- 
bani,  nomen  ejus  Saxonicum  nee  immerito  in  nomen  gratificum  est 
conversuni"  (op.  cit.  192). 

^  See  Plummer,  vol.  ii.  p.  175.  During  the  same  year,  according 
to  Thomas  of  Elmham,  Petronius,  the  fifth  abbot  of  SS.  Peter  and 
Paul's  Monastery  at  Canterbury,  died.  He  adds  that  his  burial-place 
was  not  known  {op.  cit.  183).  He  was  succeeded  by  Nathanael,  one 
of  the  monks  who  had  come  with  Mellitus  and  Justus  {ib.  184). 

*  Bede,  iii.  20,  *  iv,  2, 


ARCHBISHOP  DEUSDEDIT  337 

of  the  plague  which  followed  close  upon  it  (14th 
July,  A.D.  664),  Deusdedit  also  died  at  this  time.^ 
Thomas  of  Elmham  gives  his  epitaph  : — 

"Alme  Deusdedit,  cui  sexta  vocatio  cedit, 
Signas  hunc  lapidem,  lapidi  signatus  eidem. 
Prodit  ab  hac  urna  virtute  salus  diuturna. 
Qua  melioratur  quicunque  dolore  gravatur." 

Earconberht,  King  of  Kent,  died  on  the  same  day. 
It  is  very  probable  they  both  in  fact  died  of  the 
plague,  to  which,  as  a  most  potent  factor  in  the 
annals  of  the  sixth  and  seventh  century,  both 
religious  and  secular,  I  propose  to  devote  a  some- 
what detailed  account  in  the  first  Appendix. 

On  the  death  of  Archbishop  Deusdedit,  on  the 
14th  of  July  664,  there  was  apparently  a  great 
difficulty  in  filling  his  place.  Bede  says  the  see 
became  vacant  for  a  considerable  time.^  The 
accounts  of  what  followed  are  not  quite  consistent. 
In  his  history  of  the  abbots,  which  is  the  earlier 
and  more  trustworthy  work,  Bede  tells  us  that 
Ecgbercht,  King  of  Kent,  sent  out  of  the  kingdom 
a  man  named  WIghard,  who  had  been  elected 
to  the  office  of  bishop.  He  was  a  person  who 
had  been  sufficiently  instructed  in  every  kind 
of  ecclesiastical  institution  {omni  aecclcsiastica 
instihitione  siLfficienter  edoctus)  by  the  Roman 
disciples  of  the  blessed  Pope  Gregory  in  Kent.^ 
It  was  Ecgbercht's  desire  that  Wighard  should  be 
ordained   at    Rome    as    his    own    bishop,    so   that, 

1  Op.  cit.  193.  2  /y  £-^  jv    I. 

^  Bede,  Historia  Abbaium,  par.  3. 
22 


3  38    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

possessing  a  bishop  of  his  own  nation  and 
language,  "he  himself  and  the  people  who  were 
subject  to  him,  might  become  the  more  perfectly 
instructed  in  the  words  and  mysteries  of  the  faith, 
inasmuch  as  they  would  then  receive  them  not 
through  the  medium  of  an  interpreter,  but  from  the 
tongue  and  the  hands  of  a  kinsman  and  a  fellow- 
countryman."  In  all  this,  not  a  word  is  said  of 
Northumbria.  The  whole  question  is  treated  as  a 
Kentish  question,  and  was  decided  by  the  Kentish 
King  to  meet  his  own  needs  and  convenience.  The 
notice  is  interesting  as  showing  how  irksome  the 
ministrations  of  the  foreign  monks  who  did  not 
know  English  (or,  if  they  did,  knew  it  very  badly) 
had  become,  and  how  anxious  the  King  was  to 
have  an  English  archbishop  who  could  speak  to 
him  and  his  people  in  their  own  tongue,  who  was 
English  in  his  ways  and  instincts,  and  who  was  very 
learned  in  matters  of  ecclesiastical  discipline  (vtr 
m  ecclesiasticis  disciplinis  doctissifnus)}  Wighard 
was  the  bearer  of  some  lordly  gifts  for  the  Pope, 
including  not  a  few  gold  and  silver  vessels  (vasts). 
On  arriving  at  Rome,  where  Vitalian  was  then 
Pope,  he  had  an  interview  with  the  latter,  and 
reported  the  object  of  his  mission  ;  but  most 
unfortunately,  he  soon  after,  with  the  majority  of 
those  who  had  gone  with  him,  perished  of  the 
plague. 

With  the  death  of  Deusdedit  passed  away  the 
^  Bede,  J7.E.  iv.  i. 


END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINKS  MISSION      339 

last  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  who  belonged  to 
the  mission  of  St.  Augustine  and  who  could  trace 
his  Orders  to  that  evangelist.  It  is  a  very  remark- 
able thing  that  this  "  succession  "  should  have  been 
permitted  to  die  out.  It  could  not  be  because 
of  any  increased  stringency  in  the  rule  about 
ordination  by  a  single  bishop,  since  there  was  still 
a  bishop  in  East  Anglia  (who  however,  died  soon 
after),  who  might  have  concurred  with  Deusdedit. 
It  cannot  have  been  that  Deusdedit,  not  having 
received  a  pall,  did  not  feel  competent  to  consecrate 
a  bishop,  since  he  had  already  consecrated  Damian 
to  the  see  of  Rochester.^  Whatever  the  reason, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  his  death  marks  a 
distinct  gap  in  the  history  of  the  English  Church, 
and  with  it  that  Church  had  to  make  a  fresh  start. 

It  was  my  purpose  in  writing  these  pages  to  try 
and  bring  together,  as  far  as  my  materials  and  my 
limited  gifts  enabled  me,  a  connected  picture  of  the 
first  attempt  to  evangelise  England,  and  especially 
to  keep  in  view  the  fact  that  as  Britain  is  only  a 
detached  fragment  of  Europe  geographically,  its 
history  and  the  changes  and  movements  that  have 
taken  place  among  its  people  can  only  be  understood 
by  continual  reference  to  the  political  and  religious 
movements  that  have  meanwhile  occurred  elsewhere. 

I  began    by  drawing  a    detailed,    and    I    hope 

fairly  adequate,  picture  of  the  great  Pope  who  was 

the  initiator  of  the  movement,  of  the  changes  he  made 

in  the  administration,  and,  above  all,  of  the  theology 

'  Bede,  iv.  20. 


340    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

he  taught,  which  have  since  so  largely  dominated  the 
Holy  See  and  its  satellites.  To  this  I  devoted  a 
previous  volume.  I  have  tried  in  this  volume  con- 
tinually to  remember  that  Augustine  the  Missionary 
was  what  Gregory  the  Pope,  his  master,  had  made 
him,  and  that  in  view  of  the  scantiness  of  materials 
which  have  been  preserved  in  regard  to  the  domestic 
doings  of  the  missionaries  we  may  turn  confidently 
to  the  almost  excessive  materials  supplied  by  the 
writings  of  Gregory  to  beacon  our  feet  and  illumi- 
nate our  minds  as  to  the  kind  of  religion  Augustine 
brought  and  taught. 

The  enterprise  Gregory  had  so  much  at  heart 
and  which  he  so  much  cherished  might  perhaps  have 
had  a  more  successful  issue  if  more  worldly  wisdom 
had  been  shown  in  the  selection  of  his  agents. 
Here  again,  however,  we  must  realise  how  few 
materials  were  available,  and  how,  of  these,  the  men 
who  were  willing  to  face  the  dangers  and  difficulties 
of  the  task  were  only  to  be  found  among  those  who 
had  said  a  final  good-bye  to  the  world  and  its 
attractions  and  who  were  not  men  of  the  world,  but, 
in  the  language  of  the  time,  were  saints.  On  the 
other  hand,  things  might  have  been  different  if 
England  had  been  a  united  kingdom  under  one 
ruler,  or  ruled  by  one  family,  instead  of  (as  it  was)  a 
disintegrated  body  made  up  of  several  fragments 
with  a  different  origin  and  with  very  small  common 
interests.  It  was  presently  the  work  of  the 
Church  to  create  and  foster  this  unity  and  with  it 
a  common  patriotism.      Meanwhile  the  missionary 


RESULTS  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION     341 

cause  suffered  greatly  from  the  perpetual  strife  and 
the  divergent  ambitions  of  the  various  tribes  and 
their  several  chiefs. 

The  actual  work  of  the  mission  has  been  well 
summed  up  by  Dr.  Mason.      He  says  :  "The  Augus- 
tinian    line    of  bishops   had    died  out.      Gregory's 
sanguine  vision  of  two  metropolitans  with  twelve 
suffragans  apiece  was  very  far  from  being  realised. 
Eleven    bishops    in    all    owed    their    consecration 
directly  or  indirectly  to  Augustine.     The  first  six 
of    these    were     Italians,    who    either   came    with 
Augustine     or    joined     him    in     601  —  Laurence, 
Mellitus,       Justus,       Romanus,       Paulinus,       and 
Honorius."     All    of    these    except     Romanus    are 
claimed  as  alumni  of  St.   Andrew's  Monastery    in 
the    inscription    inscribed    on    the    facade    of    the 
existing  church.     They  occur  with  others,  including 
Paulinus  the  Evanorelist  of  Northumbria,  and  Peter 
the   Abbot  of   Canterbury,   and   the   whole   list  is 
headed  :   "  From  this  monastery  there  set  out,"  etc. 
{£x  hoc  mo7iasterio  prodierunt).     "The  other  five 
were    Englishmen — Deusdedit,    Ithamar,    Damian, 
Thomas,  and  Boniface,  who  occupied  the  sees  of 
Canterbury,  Rochester,  and  Dunwich.      Boniface  of 
Dunwich  was  the  last.      He  died  in  the  year  that 
Theodore  reached  England.      In  him  that  succession 
became  extinct.     No  sacred  Orders  now  existing  can 
be  traced  up  to  Augustine.     If  the  episcopal  succes- 
sion is  the  framework  of  the  structure  of  the  Church, 
the  foundation  of  the  present  Church  of  England 
begins  with  Theodore  of  Tarsus.    Again,  only  a  small 


342    THE  END  OF  SAINT  AUGUSTINE'S  MISSION 

part  of  England,   it  will  have  been  seen,  directly 
owes  its  Christianity  to   the   missionaries   sent  by 
Gregory.     Canterbury  was  the  one  and  only  centre 
in   which   the   work   begun   by   them   had    had   an 
uninterrupted    and    continuous    history.       Even   at 
Rochester,  within  the  kingdom  of  Kent  itself,  there 
was  a  short  break.      London,  so  far  as  any  visible 
result  was  concerned,  wholly  repudiated  their  opera- 
tions.    Their  magnificent  successes  in  Northumbria 
were  to  a  great  extent  swept  away.     East  Anglia 
alone  (out  of  Kent)  retained  ecclesiastical  connection 
with  them  from  the  time  of  its  first  acceptance  of  the 
Gospel ;  but  so  far  as  we  can  see  they  would  hardly 
have  evangelised  East  Anglia  but  for  their  timely 
reinforcement   by    the    Burgundian   bishop,    Felix. 
The    first    Christianising   of   Wessex    was   accom- 
plished without  the  least  reference  to  the  chair  of 
Augustine,  indeed    almost    in    defiance   of  it.  .  .   . 
Nevertheless,  the   history  of   the  Church  of  Eng- 
land begins  with  Augustine  and  centres  round  his 
see  of  Canterbury."^ 

Having  thus  traced  the  thread  of  the  history  of 
the  English  Church  down  to  where  it  broke  in  twain, 
I  have  reached  a  fitting  halting-place.  I  hope  I 
may  be  able  in  a  third  volume  to  describe  how 
the  broken  thread  was  again  pieced,  and  how 
under  happier  conditions  and  stronger  men  the 
Church's  second  start  proved  more  fruitful  and 
more  lasting. 

^  Mason,  The  Mission  of  St.  Augustine.^  pp.  202-203. 


APPENDIX    I 

The  Bubonic  Plague  in  the  Sixth  and 
Seventh  Centuries 

There  is  no  more  dismal  episode  in  the  world's 
history,  nor  yet  one  the  effects  of  which  have  been  so 
inadequately  appreciated,  as  the  desolating  and  wide- 
spread epidemic  which  depopulated  Europe  in  the 
first  half  of  the  seventh  century.  There  have  been 
many  and  terrible  plagues  which  have  decimated 
the  world  at  times,  and  notably  the  Black  Death  in 
the  fourteenth  century,  but  I  know  of  none  in 
which  the  effects  were  so  awful  in  selecting  for 
destruction  in  such  large  numbers,  those  men  who 
were  the  very  salt  of  the  human  family.  This 
kind  of  material  was  not  too  abundant  in  the  sixth 
and  early  seventh  centuries,  and  the  corresponding 
loss  and  penalty  were  terrible.  The  particular 
epidemic  to  which  I  refer  was  known  to  the  Latin 
writers  as  the  Lties  inguinaria,  i.e.  the  bubonic 
plague.  It  apparently  broke  out  in  special 
paroxysms  and  was  then  comparatively  dormant 
for  a  while.  In  describing  the  plague  and  its 
effects,  I  cannot  do  better  than  adopt  one  of  those 
magnificent  pieces  of  condensed  rhetoric  in  which 


344     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Gibbon  has  so  often  baffled  imitation,  and  in 
wliich  the  craft  of  the  historian  is  presented  in  its 
most  ideal  form.  "  ^Ethiopia  and  Egypt,"  he  says, 
"have  been  stigmatised  in  every  age  as  the  original 
source  and  seminary  of  the  plague.  In  a  damp, 
hot,  stagnating  air,  this  African  fever  is  generated 
from  the  putrefaction  of  animal  substances,  and 
especially  from  the  swarms  of  locusts,  not  less 
destructive  to  mankind  in  their  death  than  in  their 
lives.  The  fatal  disease,  which  depopulated  the 
earth  in  the  time  of  Justinian  and  his  successors, 
first  appeared  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Pelusium, 
between  the  Serbonian  bog  and  the  eastern  channel 
of  the  Nile.  From  thence,  tracing  as  it  were  a 
double  path,  it  spread  to  the  East,  over  Syria, 
Persia,  and  the  Indies,  and  penetrated  to  the  West, 
along  the  coast  of  Africa,  and  over  the  continent 
of  Europe.  In  the  spring  of  the  second  year, 
Constantinople,  during  three  or  four  months,  was 
visited  by  the  pestilence ;  and  Procopius,  who 
observed  its  progress  and  symptoms  with  the  eyes 
of  a  physician,  has  emulated  the  skill  and  diligence 
of  Thucydides  in  the  description  of  the  plague  of 
Athens.  The  infection  was  sometimes  announced 
by  the  visions  of  a  distempered  fancy,  and  the 
victim  despaired  as  soon  as  he  had  heard  the 
menace  and  felt  the  stroke  of  an  invisible  spectre. 
But  the  greater  number,  in  their  beds,  in  the 
streets,  in  their  usual  occupation,  were  surprised 
by  a  slight  fever ;  so  slight,  indeed,  that  neither 
the  pulse  nor  the  colour  of  the  patient  gave  any 


APPENDIX  I  345 

signs  of  the  approaching  danger.  The  same  the 
next,  or  the  succeeding  day  ;  it  was  declared  by  the 
swelling  of  the  glands,  particularly  those  of  the 
groin  "  (whence  its  name  of  lues  inginnarid),  "  of  the 
armpits,  and  under  the  ear ;  and,  when  these 
buboes  or  tumours  were  opened,  they  were  found 
to  contain  a  coal^  or  black  substance,  of  the  size  of 
a  lentil.  If  they  came  to  a  just  swelling  and 
suppuration,  the  patient  was  saved  by  this  kind 
and  natural  discharge  of  the  morbid  humour. 
But,  if  they  continued  hard  and  dry,  a  mortification 
quickly  ensued,  and  the  fifth  day  was  commonly 
the  term  of  his  life.  The  fever  was  often  accom- 
panied with  lethargy  or  delirium  ;  the  bodies  of  the 
sick  were  covered  with  black  pustules  or  carbuncles, 
the  symptoms  of  immediate  death ;  and  in  the 
constitutions  too  feeble  to  produce  an  eruption,  the 
vomiting  of  blood  was  followed  by  a  mortification 
of  the  bowels.  To  pregnant  women  the  plague 
was  generally  mortal ;  yet  one  infant  was  drawn 
alive  from  his  dead  mother,  and  three  mothers 
survived  the  loss  of  their  infected  foetus.  Youth 
was  the  most  perilous  season,  and  the  female  sex 
was  less  susceptible  than  the  male ;  but  every  rank 
and  profession  was  attacked  with  indiscriminate 
rage,  and  many  of  those  who  escaped  were  de- 
prived of  the  use  of  their  speech,  without  being 
secure  from  a  return  of  the  disorder.  The 
physicians  of  Constantinople  were  zealous  and 
skilful,  but  their  art  was  bafiled  by  the  various 
symptoms    and    pertinacious    vehemence    of    the 


34<5     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

disease ;  the  same  remedies  were  productive  of 
contrary  effects,  and  the  event  capriciously  dis- 
appointed their  prognostics  of  death  or  recovery. 
The  order  of  funerals  and  the  right  of  sepulchres 
were  confounded ;  those  who  were  left  without 
friends  or  servants  lay  unburied  in  the  streets  or 
in  their  desolate  houses ;  and  a  magistrate  was 
authorised  to  collect  the  promiscuous  heaps  of 
dead  bodies,  to  transport  them  by  land  or  water, 
and  to  inter  them  in  deep  pits  beyond  the  precincts 
of  the  city.  Their  own  danger  and  the  prospect 
of  public  distress  awakened  some  remorse  in  the 
minds  of  the  most  vicious  of  mankind  ;  the  con- 
fidence of  health  again  revived  their  passions  and 
habits ;  but  philosophy  must  disdain  the  observa- 
tion of  Procopius  that  the  lives  of  such  men  were 
guarded  by  the  peculiar  favour  of  fortune  or 
providence.  He  forgot,  or  perhaps  he  secretly 
recollected,  that  the  plague  had  touched  the  person 
of  Justinian  himself;  but  the  abstemious  diet  of 
the  Emperor  may  suggest,  as  in  the  case  of 
Socrates,  a  more  rational  and  honourable  cause  for 
his  recovery.  During  his  sickness  the  public 
consternation  was  expressed  in  the  habits  of  the 
citizens ;  and  their  idleness  and  despondence  occa- 
sioned a  general  scarcity  in  the  capital  of  the  East. 
"Contagion  is  the  inseparable  symptom  of  the 
plague  ;  which,  by  mutual  respiration,  is  transfused 
from  the  infected  persons  to  the  lungs  and  stomach 
of  those  who  approach  them.  While  philosophers 
believe  and  tremble,  it  is  singular  that  the  existence 


APPENDIX  I  347 

of  a  real  clanger  should  have  been  denied  by  a 
people  most  prone  to  vain  and  imaginary  terrors. 
Yet  the  fellow-citizens  of  Procopius  were  satisfied, 
by  some  short  and  partial  experience,  that  the 
infection  could  not  be  gained  by  the  closest  con- 
versation ;  and  this  persuasion  might  support  the 
assiduity  of  friends  or  physicians  in  the  care  of  the 
sick,  whom  inhuman  prudence  would  have  con- 
demned to  solitude  and  despair.  But  the  fatal 
security,  like  the  predestination  of  the  Turks,  must 
have  aided  the  progress  of  the  contagion,  and 
those  salutary  precautions  to  which  Europe  is 
indebted  for  her  safety  were  unknown  to  the 
government  of  Justinian.  No  restraints  were 
imposed  on  the  free  and  frequent  intercourse  of 
the  Roman  provinces  ;  from  Persia  to  France,  the 
nations  were  mingled  and  infected  by  wars  and 
emigrations ;  and  the  pestilential  odour  which  lurks 
for  years  in  a  bale  of  cotton  was  imported,  by  the 
abuse  of  trade,  into  the  most  distant  regions.  The 
mode  of  its  propagation  is  explained  by  the  remark 
of  Procopius  himself,  that  it  always  spread  from 
the  seacoast  to  the  inland  country ;  the  most 
sequestered  islands  and  mountains  were  successively 
visited  ;  the  places  which  had  escaped  the  fury  of 
its  first  passage  were  alone  exposed  to  the 
contagion  of  the  ensuing  year.  The  winds  might 
diffuse  that  subtle  venom  ;  but,  unless  the  atmo- 
sphere be  previously  disposed  for  its  reception,  the 
plague  would  soon  expire  in  the  cold  or  temperate 
climates   of    the    earth.     Such    was    the  universal 


348     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

corruption  of  the  air,  that  the  pestilence  which 
burst  forth  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Justinian  was 
not  checked  or  alleviated  by  any  difference  of  the 
seasons.  In  time,  its  first  malignity  was  abated 
and  dispersed  ;  the  disease  alternately  languished 
and  revived ;  but  it  was  not  till  the  end  of  a 
calamitous  period  of  fifty-two  years  that  mankind 
recovered  their  health  or  the  air  resumed  its  pure 
and  salubrious  quality.  No  facts  have  been  pre- 
served to  sustain  an  account,  or  even  a  conjecture, 
of  the  numbers  that  perished  in  this  extraordinary 
mortality.  I  only  find  that,  during  three  months, 
five,  and  at  length  ten,  thousand  persons  died  each 
day  at  Constantinople ;  that  many  cities  of  the 
East  were  left  vacant;  and  that  in  several  districts 
of  Italy  the  harvest  and  the  vintage  withered  on 
the  ground.  The  triple  scourge  of  war,  pestilence, 
and  famine  afifiicted  the  subjects  of  Justinian,  and 
his  reign  is  disgraced  by  a  visible  decrease  of  the 
human  species  which  has  never  been  repaired  in 
some  of  the  fairest  countries  of  the  globe."  ^ 

"The  plague,"  says  Dr.  Bury,  "seems  to  have 
appeared  in  Egypt  in  541.  Before  the  end  of  the 
year  it  was  probably  carried  to  Constantinople, 
for  Theophanes  says  that  it  broke  out  in  October, 
A.D.  541,  but  it  did  not  begin  to  rage  till  the 
following  year,  a.d.  542,  the  year  of  the  third  in- 
vasion of  Chosroes."  Bury  doubts  the  statement  of 
Gibbon  that  it  penetrated  into  the  west  "along  the 

^  Gibbon,  Decline  and  Fall  of  tlie  Rojnan  Empire,  ed.  Bury,  iv. 
436-440. 


APPENDIX  I  349 

coast  of  Africa."  It  must  have  reached  Africa 
from  Constantinople,  and  the  desert  west  of 
Cyrenaica,  the  modern  TripoHs,  was  an  effectual 
barrier  against  the  invasion  ;  and  Corippus  distinctly 
says  the  Moors  escaped  it.  The  malady  spread  in 
Africa  in  a.d.  543.^ 

The  same  author  attributes  the  lassitude  and 
change  of  character  which  overtook  Justinian  in 
his  later  days  to  the  results  of  his  own  attack  of 
the  plague.  "He  was  touched,"  he  says,  "with 
dispiritedness  or  with  the  malady  of  the  Middle 
Age."  ^  As  Bury  says,  its  presence  in  Persia  caused 
Chosroes  to  retire  prematurely  from  his  campaign 
in  542,  a  few  months  before  it  reached  Con- 
stantinople, where  it  raged  for  four  months. 
"  Procopius  was  especially  impressed  with  the 
universality  of  the  scourge  ;  it  did  not  assail  any 
particular  race  or  class  of  men,  nor  prevail  in  any 
particular  region,  nor  at  any  particular  season  of 
the  year.  Summer  or  winter,  north  or  south, 
Greek  or  Arabian,  washed  or  unwashed — of  these 
distinctions  the  plague  took  no  account ;  it  pervaded 
the  whole  world.  A  man  might  climb  to  the  top 
of  a  hill,  it  was  there :  or  retire  to  the  depth  of  a 
cavern,  it  was  there  also.  If  it  passed  by  a  spot,  it 
was  sure  to  return  to  it  again."  The  frivolous  and 
the  wicked  seemed  to  escape  the  most  readily.  In 
the  words  of  Procopius  :  "  This  pestilence,  whether 
by  chance  or  providential  design,  strictly  spared  the 

^  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire^  ed.  Bury,  iv.  436  and 
437,  note  128. 

^  The  Latei'  Roman  Emph-e,  i.  358. 


3  50     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

most  wicked."  "The  plague,"  continues  Mr.  Bury, 
speaking  of  the  years  542  and  543,  "aggravated 
the  disastrous  condition  of  the  people,  which  had 
suffered  from  the  pressure  of  taxation.  It  pro- 
duced a  stagnation  of  trade  and  a  cessation  of 
work.  All  customary  occupations  were  broken  off, 
and  the  market-places  were  empty,  save  of  corpse- 
bearers.  The  consequence  was  that  Constantinople, 
always  richly  supplied,  was  in  a  state  of  famine,  and 
bread  was  a  great  luxury. 

"In  558  there  was  another  outbreak  of  the 
pestilential  scourge  in  the  East ;  it  lurked  and 
lingered  in  Europe  long  after  the  first  grand 
visitation.  In  the  last  years  of  Justinian  it  pro- 
duced a  desolation  in  Liguria  which  was  graphically 
described  by  Paul,  the  historian  of  the  Lombards. 
*  Videres,'  he  writes,  'saeculum  in  antiquum  re- 
dactum  silentium,' — the  country  seemed  plunged  in 
a  primeval  silence."  ^ 

It  was  equally  fatal  elsewhere.  An  outbreak 
of  the  bubonic  plague  occurred  in  the  year  600  in 
the  army  of  the  Great  Khan  of  the  Avars,  who  lost 
seven  sons  in  one  day,  and  compelled  the  heart- 
broken chief  to  raise  the  siege  of  Constantinople 
and  to  withdraw.^ 

It  is  no  wonder  that  the  Greek  historians  of 
those  times,  who  still  mingled  philosophy  with  their 
narratives,  were  baffled  by  trying  to  find  an 
explanation  which  should  justify  to    their    readers 

^  The  Later  Roman  Empire,  i.  402  and  403. 
*  lb.  ii.  139,  Theoph^nes  ad  an. 


APPENDIX  I  351 

the  terrible  and  apparently  arbitrary  destruction  of 
human  life  in  this  dread  visitation,  which  looked 
so  much  more  like  the  operations  of  an  aimless 
fate  than  of  the  tender  Father  of  mankind 
Procopius  and  Agathias,  one  a  determinist  and  the 
other  a  champion  of  free  will,  and  both  men  of 
remarkable  faith,  tried  their  hand  and  found  no 
better  solution  than  in  attributing  the  scourge  to  the 
punishment  of  a  wicked  race  by  a  wrathful  God. 

We  have  seen  in  a  former  volume  what  a 
terrible  visitation  of  the  plague  there  was  at  the  end 
of  the  sixth  century  in  Italy,  when  Pope  Pelagius 
died  of  it  and  the  city  was  desolated,  while  it  was 
one  of  the  glories  of  St.  Gregory's  reign  as  Pope 
to  design  measures  for  its  mitigation. 

In  his  Dialogues  Gregory  gives  a  bizarre 
account  of  a  boy  called  Theodore,  to  illustrate  his 
theory  that  the  soul,  while  still  in  the  body,  receives 
punishment  both  for  its  own  good  and  the  benefit  of 
others.  He  says  that  Theodore  was  a  very  unruly 
boy,  and  with  his  brother,  entered  St.  Gregory's 
Monastery  on  the  Caelian  Hill,  where  he  was  very 
unwilling  to  hear  any  talk  about  spiritual  matters, 
and  would  scoff  or  swear  or  protest  against  the 
notion  that  he  would  ever  adopt  a  spiritual  life. 
When  the  plague  came,  and  the  greater  part 
of  the  city  was  grievously  stricken,  Theodore 
himself  lay  sick,  and  being  at  the  point  of  death 
all  the  monks  repaired  to  his  chamber  to  pray 
for  the  happy  departure  of  his  soul,  which  could 
not  apparently  be  far  off,  since  half  his  body  was 


35  2     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

dead  and  only  a  little  life  remained  in  his  breast. 
Thereupon  he  cried  out  and  tried  to  interrupt  their 
devotions,  bidding  them  depart,  since  he  said  he 
was  being  devoured  by  a  dragon  and  their  presence 
prevented  him  from  dispatching  him.  "  He  hath 
already  swallowed  my  head  in  his  mouth :  why 
should  they  prevent  him  having  his  way  if  it  was 
his  fate  to  eventually  devour  me  ?  "  The  monks  at 
these  fearful  words  bade  him  sign  himself  with  the 
cross.  He  declared  he  would  do  this  willingly  if 
he  could,  but  he  could  not,  as  he  was  so  loaded  with 
the  dragon's  scales.  Thereupon  the  monks  all  fell 
on  their  knees  and  piteously  prayed  God  to  deliver 
the  boy,  who  mercifully  heard  them,  for  he 
presently  declared  that  the  dragon  had  fled,  and 
asked  them  to  pray  for  forgiveness  of  his  sins, 
declaring  that  he  was  ready  to  adopt  a  better  life. 
He  thus  turned  to  God  with  his  whole  heart. ^ 

A  few  words  must  be  added  in  regard  to  the 
effects  of  the  plague  farther  west.  Gregory  of  Tours, 
in  describing  the  career  of  St.  Gall,  refers  to  its 
devastations  in  Gaul,  especially  in  the  diocese  of 
Aries.  He  tells  us  how,  by  the  prayers  of  the  Saint, 
the  city  of  Auvergne  escaped  the  malady,  and  adds 
that  the  poor  people  in  his  diocese  were  conscious 
of  a  special  protection,  since  they  noticed  that  the 
houses  and  churches  there  were  marked  with  a  Tau!^ 

Some  years  later,  namely,  in  571,  the  pest 
broke  out  with  especial  virulence  in  the  same 
district.      There     was     such     a     mortality,     says 

^  Op.  cit.  lib.  iv,  ch.  xxxvii.  ^  Op.  cit.  iv.  ch.  v. 


APPENDIX  I  35  3 

Gregory,  that  it  was  impossible  to  count  the 
multitudes  who  perished.  There  were  not  sufficient 
coffins  in  which  to  place  the  dead,  and  they  were 
buried  ten  or  more  in  a  single  hole.  On  one 
Sunday  three  hundred  corpses  were  to  be  found  in 
the  basilica  of  St.  Peter.  "  Death  came  very 
suddenly,"  says  our  author.  "  There  arose  in  the 
armpit  or  the  groin  a  sore  in  the  form  of  a  serpent, 
and  within  two  or  three  days  the  victim  died,  after 
losing  his  senses.  Thus  perished  the  priest  Cato, 
who,  while  others  fled,  remained  faithfully  to  tend 
the  sick.  The  bishop  Cautinus,  who  had  wandered 
hither  and  thither  to  escape  the  malady,  and  who  re- 
turning to  the  city,  caught  it,  and  died  on  the  Sunday 
of  the  Passion.  Tetradius,  his  cousin,  died  at  the 
same  time.  Lyons,  Bourges,  Chalon,  and  Dijon 
were  grievously  depopulated  during  the  attack."^ 

In  580  the  pest  took  another  form  all  over  Gaul, 
namely,  that  of  a  most  deadly  dysentery,  a  violent 
fever  with  vomitings  of  a  nauseous  kind,  with  pains 
in  the  kidneys,  while  the  heads  and  necks  of  the 
victims  turned  yellow  and  even  green  in  colour  (!). 
The  peasants  fancied  that  their  hearts  were  covered 
with  boils  [Rusticiores  vero  cor  ales  hoc  pusulas 
nominabani).  Some  found  a  cure  in  profuse  blood- 
letting, in  which  the  blood  seemed  corrupted,  while 
others  had  recourse  to  potions  made  by  the  herb 
doctors.  The  disease  began  in  August  and  es- 
pecially attacked  infants.  Among  others  who  were 
attacked  were  King  Chilperic  and  his  two  sons,  and 

^  Op.  cit.  iv.  31. 


3  54     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

even  the  fierce  and  cruel  Fredegondis,  his  wife,  was 
moved  into  some  semblance  of  tenderness  by  the 
appalling  malady,  and  persuaded   her   husband  to 
burn  the  registers  of  the  tax-collectors.     One  of  her 
two  sons  died.     Another  victim  of  the  disease  was 
Austr^childis,  the  shameless  wife  of  King  Gontran, 
"  who,  in  dying,"  says  Gregory,  "  decreed  that  people 
should  weep  for  others  beside  herself,  and  made  her 
husbandpromisetoputherdoctorstodeath."  Another 
prominent  victim  was  Nantin,  Count  of  Angouleme.^ 
A  litde  later  another  outbreak  took  the  form  of 
a  kind  of  smallpox  at  Senlis,  while  Nantes  was  deso- 
lated by  the  true  plague  itself.     A mong  the  victims  of 
the  former  was  Felix,  Bishop  of  Nantes,  the  details 
of  whose  illness  are  given  by  Gregory  of  Tours.' 

Lastly,  somewhat  later,  we  read  of  the  renewal 
of  the  plague  at  Narbonne  after  a  surcease  of  three 
years,  and  of  its  causing  a  terrible  mortality  there. 
The  famous  city  of  Albi  also  suffered  grievously.^ 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  great  islands  beyond 
the  English  Channel  which  so  immediately  concern 
us,  and  first  to  Ireland,  where  our  documents  are 
most  abundant.  In  the  Annals  of  Ulster  we  read 
under  the  year  544  of  the  first  mortality,  which  is 
called  blefed,  in  which  Mobi  Clarainech  died. 
The  Chron.  Scot,  dates  this  in  541,  and  tells  us  the 
victim  was  called  Bercan.  Under  the  year  548  we 
read  in  the  Ulster  Annals  of  a  great  mortality,  in 
which  Finnio  Macc-U-Telduibh,  Colam  descendant 

1  Op.  cit.  V.  35-39.  ^  lb.  vi.  14  and  15. 

3  lb.  ch.  xxxiii. 


APPENDIX  I  355 

of  Craumthanan,  Mac  Tail  of  Cill  Cuilind,  Sinchell, 
son  of  Cenandan,  Abbot  of  Cill^achaidh  of  Druim- 
fota  and  Colum  of  Inisceltra,  died/     In  the  year  553 
we    read:    "The    distemper,    which    is    called    the 
Samthrose''  (it  is  glossed  by  scabiem,  and  no  doubt 
the  word  means  a  skin  disease).      In  555  2  we  read  : 
"A  great  mortality  in  this  year,  i.e.  the  cron-conaill, 
i.e.  the  buidhe  ckonailC     Cron,  says  Dr.  Hennessy, 
means  saffron-coloured,  and  duidke,  yellow  ;  conaill'is 
the  same  as  the  word  connall  (glossed  b)'  stipulamy 
In  the  year  663  (660  in  the  Chron.  Scotorum) 
we  read  in  the  Annals  of  Ulster:    "A  pestilence 
reached   Ireland  on    the    kalends  of  August. 
The    mortality    raged    at    first    in    Magh    Itho    of 
Fothart."     In    the    Annals    of   the    Four    Masters 
we    read    under    the    same    year:    "  Baetan    Mac- 
Ua-Cormaic,    Abbot    of    Cluain    mic    Nois,    died. 
Comdhan     Maccutheanne ;     Bearach,     Abbot     of 
Beannchair  ;  Cearnach  Sotal,  son  of  Diarmaid,  son 
of  Aedh  Slaine,  died,  together  with  the  aforesaid 
persons,  of  a  mortality  which  arose  in   Ireland,  on 
the  Calends  of  the  August  of  this  year  in   M^gh 
Itha,  in  Fotharta." 

In  664  the  Ulster  Annals  again  speak  of  a 
great  mortality.  "Diarmait,  son  of  Aedh  Slaine, 
and  Blathmac  (his  brother),  two  kings  of  Erin,  and 
Maelbresail,  son  of  Maelduin,  died  of  the  Buidhe 
chonaill,  Ultan,  the  son  of  Cunga,  Abbot  of  Cluain 
Iraird,  died.    The  falling  asleep  of  Feichen  of  Fabhar 

'  Ckrcn.  ^^^/.  puts  it  in  551.  ^  The  Chron.  ScoL  puts  it  in  554. 

See  Annals  of  Ulster,  vol.  i.  p.  55,  note  5. 


3  56     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

[i.e.  St.  Ferchin,  Abbot  of  Fobhar),  that  is,  from  the 
same  distemper,  and  of  Aileran  (or  Ereran)  the 
Wise,  and  Cronan,  son  of  Silne.  Cu  cen  mathair, 
son  of  Cathal,  King-  of  Munster,  died.  Blathmac  of 
Tethba,  Oengus  Uladh,  Manchan  of  Liath,  and 
bishops  and  abbots,  and  other  persons  innumerable 
died.  Colman  Cas,  Abbot  of  Cluain  mic  Nois,  and 
Cummeni,  Abbot  of  Cluain  mic  Nois,  slept." 

The  Chiton.  Scotorum,  which  dates  these  deaths 
wrongly  in  66 1,  adds  to  the  names  just  given 
Ronan,  son  of  Berach,  Maeldoid,  son  of  Finghin. 

In  665  there  is  a  long  obituary  in  the  Ulster 
Annals,  and,  although  the  cause  of  death  is  not 
actually  given,  we  can  hardly  doubt  it  was  the 
plague.  It  includes  Ailill  Flannessa,  son  of 
Domnall,  son  of  Aedh,  son  of  Ainmire ;  Maelcaich, 
son  of  Scannal  of  the  Cruithni ;  and  Maelduin,  son 
of  Scannal,  King  of  Cinal  Coirpi ;  also  Eochaid 
larlaithi.  King  of  the  Cruithni ;  Dubhinnrecht,  son 
of  Dunchad,  King  of  Ui  Briuin-Ai ;  and  Cellach,  son 
of  Guaire  ;  while  the  same  author  says  that  "  Guaire 
Aidhne  also  died,  according  to  another  book  "  (his 
death  had  been  reported  in  662).^  The  Four  Masters 
add  the  additional  name  of  Baeithin,  Abbot  of 
Beannchair  or  Bangor.  In  666  the  Annals  of 
Ulster  repeat  that  there  was  a  mortality  in  Ireland. 
The  Chron.  Scot.,  which  wrongly  puts  this  in  663, 
states  that  four  Abbots  of  Bennchair  Uladh  {i.e.  of 
Bangor  in  Ulster)  died  of  this  plague,  namely, 
Berach,   Cumine,  Colum,  and  Aedhan.    The  Four 

^  The  same  deaths  are  reported  in  the  Chron.  Scot,  in  662. 


APPENDIX  I  357 

Masters  date  it  in  666.  In  667  the  Ulster  Annals 
again  refer  to  a  great  mortality,  i.e.  the  Buidhe 
chonaill,  adding,  "  Fergus,  son  of  Mucoid,  died, 
Diarmaid  and  Blathmace,  the  two  Kinors  of  Ireland, 
and  Feichin  of  Fobhar,  and  many  others  died,  i.e.  of 
the  Buidhe  chonaill,  according  to  another  book."^ 

In  682^  we  read  in  the  Ulster  Annals,  "the 
beginning  of  the  mortality  of  children  in  the  month 
of  October."  In  the  year  683^  there  is  in  the 
same  Annals  the  entry,  "Mortality  of  the  Children  " 
[mortaliias  parvuloT2ivi).  Neither  of  these  facts 
is  mentioned  in  the  Annals  of  the  Four  Masters. 
They  have  a  reference,  however,  in  684  to  a  mortality 
amonganimals  in  general  throughout  the  whole  world 
for  the  space  of  three  years,  so  that  there  escaped 
not  one  out  of  a  thousand  of  any  kind  of  animals. 
This  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Ulster  Annals  nor  the 
Chron.  Scot. 

Turninof  from  Ireland  to  the  Welsh  records,  we 
first  read  of  the  plague  in  547,  when  we  are  told 
there  was  a  great  mortality  in  which  Mailcun,  King 
of  Gwenedota,  or  North  Wales  died  (pausat).  In 
682  we  read  there  was  a  great  mortality  in  Britain, 
in  which  "  Cats^ualart,  son  of  CatCTuolaum,"  died.* 

Adamnan,  in  his  life  of  St.  Columba,  has  an 
interesting  reference  to  the  plague.  He  says  that 
in  his  time  it  twice  devastated  the  greater  part  of 
the  world.      "  I  will  be  silent,"  he  says,  "in  regard 

^  These  names  had  aheady  been  mentioned  in  these  Annals  in 
previous  years  ;  see  Reeve's  Adamnan,  p.  182. 

-  679  in  the  Chron.  Scot.  ^  680  in  Chron.  Scot 

*  An.  Cambr.,  M.H.B.,  pp.  831  and  833. 


3  58     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

to  other  regions,  such  as  Italy  and  the  city  of 
Rome,  the  provinces  of  Cis-Alpine  Gaul "  (by 
which  he  means  Gaul  north  of  the  Alps),  "and 
Spain."  He  then  says  that  the  islands  of  Britain, 
that  is  to  say,  Scotia  and  Britannia  (mark  the  order 
of  the  names),  were  twice  devastated  by  the  dire 
pestilence,  except  two  peoples,  namely,  those  of  the 
Picts  and  Scots,  between  whom  the  dorsal  mountains 
of  Britain  passed,  who  were  protected  against  it,  he 
says,  by  his  own  prayers  and  those  of  his  patron 
{i.e.  of  St.  Columba).  He  claims  that  not  a  single 
one  of  the  nobles  {comites)  of  the  Picts  and  Scots  nor 
of  their  people  were  attacked  by  the  plague.^  It 
especially  wasted  Northumbria,  once  after  King 
Ecgfrid's  war,  and  the  other  time  two  years  later. 

Turning  to  England,  Bede  tells  us  how  on  the 
3rd  of  May  in  the  year  664  (which  fixes  the 
date)  there  was  an  eclipse  of  the  sun.  In  the  same 
year  a  sudden  pestilence  first  depopulated  the 
southern  coasts  of  Britain,  and  then  extended  into 
Northumbria,  and  for  a  long  time  ravaged  that 
country  far  and  near,  and  destroyed  a  great 
multitude  of  men.  Among  others,  he  says,  there 
died  Tuda,  the  Bishop  of  the  Northumbrians,  who 
was  buried  in  the  monastery  called  Paegnalaech 
(probably  Finchale,  near  Durham).  The  same 
pestilence,  he  says,  did  no  less  harm  in  Ireland. 
Many  of  the  nobility  and  of  the  middle  class  of 
the  English  nation  were  in  Ireland  at  that  time. 
In  the  days  of   Bishops  Finan  and   Colman  they 

^  Lib.  Col.  ii.  ch,  xlvi. 


APPENDIX  I  359 

had  forsaken  their  native  island  and  retired  thither 
either  for  the  sake  of  divine  studies  or  a  more 
continent  Hfe,  and  some  of  them  presently  devoted 
themselves  faithfully  to  the  monastic  life,  others 
chose  to  apply  themselves  to  study,  going  about 
from  one  master's  cell  to  another.  The  Scots  [i.e. 
the  Scots  of  Ireland)  willingly  received  them  all, 
and  took  care  to  supply  them  gratuitously  with 
daily  food  and  with  books  to  read,  and  taught  them 
without  charge.  Among  them  were  Aedllhun 
and  Ecgberht,  two  youths  of  great  capacity  of  the 
English  nobility,  the  former  of  whom  was  brother 
to  Aediluini,  who  after  studying  in  Ireland  returned 
to  England  and  became  Bishop  of  the  Lindissi.  The 
two  young  men  just  named  were  in  the  monastery 
called  Rathmelsige,  by  the  Scots  afterwards  known 
as  Mellifont,  and  having  lost  all  their  companions, 
who  were  either  cut  off  by  the  pestilence  or  dispersed 
in  other  places,  both  fell  sick  of  the  same  disease 
and  were  grievously  afflicted.  Ecgberht  recovered, 
but  Aedilhun  died.^  Another  and  more  famous 
victim  was  Bishop  Cedd,  who  died  while  on  a  visit 
to  the  monastery  of  Laestingaeu  (i.e.  Lastingham, 
near  Whitby  in  Yorkshire),  and  was  buried  first  in 
the  open  air,  but  presently  in  a  stone  church  in 
the  same  monastery.  The  terrors  of  the  plague 
seem  to  have  been  especially  severe  among  the 
East  Saxons,  many  of  whom,  we  are  told,  once 
more  relapsed  from  Christianity,  and  with  their 
King,  Sigheri,  became  apostates  and  restored  the 
^  Bede^  iii.  ch.  xxvii. 


36o     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

old  idols  and  gods.  It  is  pretty  certain,  although 
Bede  does  not  expressly  say  so,  that  Earconberht 
the  King  of  Kent,  and  Archbishop  Deusdedit,  who 
died  on  the  same  day,  namely,  the  14th  of  July 
664,  also  perished  from  the  plague.  Mr.  Plummer 
suggests  that  Bishop  Damian  of  Rochester,  who 
died  at  the  end  of  the  same  year,  was  also  carried  off 
by  the  same  visitation.  Florence  of  Worcester^ 
declares  that  Bosil,  Abbot  of  Mailros,  died  of  the 
plague  {^lethali  inorbo  pressus).  It  is  possible  that 
the  East  Anglian  King  y^thelwald,  who  also  died 
in  664,  also  perished  from  it.  Some  years  later 
St.  Chad  died  of  the  plague  on  2nd  March  672,^ 
and  during  St.  Cuthbert's  residence  on  Fame  Island 
(676-84)  nearly  all  the  Lindisfarne  community 
was  swept  off  by  it.^  St.  Aetheldrytha  died  of  it  in 
679  or  680,  and  it  was  reported  that  she  had  pro- 
phesied that  this  would  be  so  and  also  foretold  the 
number  of  her  companions  who  would  also  die.* 
As  we  have  seen,  Cadwaladar  died  in  682.^ 

The  mortality  was  especially  terrible  in  the 
monasteries,  where  the  inmates  were  congregated 
together  under  bad  sanitary  and  other  arrange- 
ments. We  have  seen  how  this  was  the  case  at 
Lindisfarne  and  Lastingham.  So  it  was  at  Selsey  ; 
thus  Bede  says  that,  about  the  time  when  the  South 
Saxons  embraced  the  faith,  a  grievous  mortality 
ran  through  many  provinces  of  Britain,  which  by 
the    divine    dispensation    reached  to   the  aforesaid 

^  M.H.B.  532.  2  Florence  of  Worcester,  ib.  533. 

'  Vit.  Cuth.,  ch.  xxvii.  *  Bede,  iv.  19. 

*  Plummer,  Bede,  ii.  195. 


APPENDIX  I  361 

monastery,  then  governed  by  Eoppa,  and  many,  as 
well  of  those  who  had  come  thither  with  the  bishop 
{i.e.  Wilfred),  as  also  of  those  of  the  South  Saxons 
who  had  been  lately  called  to  the  faith,  were  in 
many  places  snatched  out  of  this  world.  The 
brethren,  in  consequence,  thought  fit  to  keep  a  fast 
of  three  days,  and  humbly  to  implore  the  divine 
mercy.  Bede  mentions  how  at  that  time  there  was 
in  the  monastery  a  little  boy  of  Saxon  race  lately 
called  to  the  faith,  who  had  been  seized  with  the 
same  disorder  and  had  long  kept  his  bed.  On  the 
second  day  of  the  said  fasting,  the  boy  was  left 
alone  in  the  place  where  he  lay  sick,  when  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul  (Bede  calls  them  the  "  Princes  of  the 
Apostles  ")  appeared  to  him  and  bade  him  not  fear 
death,  and  told  him  that  that  very  day  after  receiv- 
ing the  viaticum  he  should  be  conducted  to  heaven 
by  themselves,  and  be  thus  freed  from  sickness. 
He  was  further  told  that  his  prayers  for  the  sick 
brethren  had  been  heard,  and  no  one  would 
thenceforth  die  of  the  plague,  either  in  the  monastery 
or  in  its  adjacent  possessions,  but  that  all  their 
people  who  were  ill  of  the  distemper  should  be 
restored  to  health,  except  himself,  who  was  to  be 
carried  at  once  to  heaven  as  a  reward  for  his 
services.  This  good  fortune,  they  said,  had  been 
due  to  the  personal  intercession  of  St.  Oswald,  who 
had  been  killed  in  battle  this  very  day,  and  was  then 
in  heaven,  and  they  were  all  bidden  to  communicate 
in  the  heavenly  sacrifice,  to  cease  from  fasting, 
and    to    refresh    themselves  with  food.     The  boy 


362     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

summoned  a  priest  and  told  him  what  had  hap- 
pened, and  described  the  heavenly  visitors  to  him. 
One  of  them,  he  said,  was  shorn  like  a  clerk,  while 
the  other  had  a  long  beard.  The  brethren  then 
ordered  dinner,  provided  that  Masses  should  be 
said,  and  that  all  should  communicate  as  usual,  and 
caused  "  a  portion  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord's 
oblation "  to  be  carried  to  the  sick  boy.  Soon 
after,  and  on  the  same  day,  the  boy  died.  No 
one  else  except  himself  at  that  time  suffered,  and 
from  that  time  we  are  told  the  day  of  the  nativity 
of  that  king  and  soldier  of  Christ  [i.e.  of  King 
Oswald)  began  to  be  yearly  honoured  with 
Masses,  not  only  in  that  monastery  but  in  many 
other  places.^ 

So  also  at  Wearmouth,  where  Bede  may  have 
been  an  eye-witness  of  what  occurred.  He  tells 
us  how,  after  Benedict  Biscop's  return  from  his 
sixth  visit  to  Rome,  he  found  troubles  awaiting 
him — among  other  things,  the  venerable  presbyter, 
Eosterwini  (whom  at  his  departure  he  had  appointed 
abbot),  and  a  large  number  of  the  brethren  had 
died  from  the  pestilence  which  was  then  everywhere 
raging. 

In  the  anonymous  History  of  the  Abbots  of 
Wearmouth  and  Jarrow  we  are  told  that  when  the 
plague  attacked  the  latter  monastery  all  who  could 
read  or  preach  or  recite  the  antiphons  and  responses 
were  swept  away,  except  Abbot  Ceolfred  himself 
and  one  little    lad  nourished   and    taught  by  him, 

^  Bede,  iv.  14. 


APPENDIX  I  363 

"  who  is  now  a  priest  of  the  same  monastery,  says 
our  author.  .  .  ,  And  the  abbot,  sad  at  heart  because 
of  this  revelation,  ordained  that,  contrary  to  their 
former  rite,  they  should,  except  at  vespers  and 
matins,  recite  their  psalms  without  antiphons.  And 
when  this  had  been  done,  with  many  tears  and 
lamentations  on  his  part,  for  the  space  of  a  week, 
he  could  not  bear  it  any  longer,  but  decreed  that 
the  psalms,  with  their  antiphons,  should  be  restored 
accordinor  to  the  order  of  the  regular  course. 
By  means  of  himself  and  the  aforesaid  boy,  he 
carried  out,  with  no  little  labour,  that  which  he 
had  decreed,  until  he  had  either  trained  himself, 
or  procured  from  elsewhere,  men  able  to  take 
part  in  the  divine  service."^  It  has  been  reason- 
ably thought  that  the  boy  here  referred  to  was 
none  other  than  Bede  himself. 

At  Barking  was  a  double  monastery  comprising 
a  house  of  monks  and  another  of  nuns.  It  would 
seem  that  the  nuns  had  their  own  cemetery.  When 
the  plague  attacked  the  part  of  the  house  where  the 
men  lived,  and  they  were  "daily  hurried  away  to 
meet  their  God,"  the  Mother  of  the  women's 
house  began  to  inquire  among  the  sisters  in  what 
part  of  the  nunnery  they  would  have  their  bodies 
buried  if  they  died  of  the  pestilence,  and  where 
a  special  burying-place  for  those  infected  was  to 
be  placed.  The  nuns  being  uncertain  about  it,  a 
special  sign  from  heaven  was  afforded  them  in 
the  form  of  a  divine  light  which  moved  along  to 

^  Plummer,  Bede^  ii.  p.  393. 


364     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  place  where  it  had  been  determined  by  the 
higher  powers  that  the  new  cemetery  should  be 
planted.^ 

"At  this  time  there  was  in  the  monastery,"  ac- 
cording to  Bede,  a  boy  about  three  years  old  named 
yEsica,  who  was  brought  up  by  the  nuns.  Having 
been  seized  by  the  plague,  when  at  the  last  gasp  he 
called  by  name  upon  one  of  the  consecrated  virgins 
as  if  she  had  been  present,  namely,  "  Eadgyd, 
Eadgyd,  Eadgyd  !  "  and  then  died.  The  virgin  in 
question  was  thereupon  immediately  seized  with 
the  distemper,  and  died  the  same  day. 

At  the  same  time,  another  of  the  nuns,  being 
ill  of  the  same  disease,  cried  out  to  her  attendants 
to  put  out  the  candle  that  lighted  her,  saying  she 
saw  the  house  full  of  light  while  the  candle  itself 
was  quite  dark.  They  heeded  not  what  she  said. 
She  then  declared  that  a  man  of  God  had  visited 
her  in  a  vision,  and  told  her  that  at  the  break  of 
day  she  should  depart  to  Eternal  Light,  which  came 
about,  for  she  died  next  morning.^ 

I  have  enlara^ed  at  oreater  leno^th  than  some 
may  deem  reasonable  on  the  details  of  the  awful 
visitations  of  pestilence  which  marked  the  sixth 
and  seventh  centuries,  and  which  destroyed  so  many 
of  the  men  and  women  among  the  classes  most 
indispensable  in  maintaining  the  life  of  man  at  an 
ideal  standard  and  especially  of  those  in  Holy 
Orders  and  the  tenants  of  the  Monasteries.  We 
cannot    realise   the    terrible    void    that   must   thus 

^  Bede,  Hist.  Eccl.  iv.  ch.  vii.  ^  lb.  ch.  viii. 


APPENDIX  I  365 

have  been  created,  nor  wonder  that  it  took  centuries 
to  reman  the  armies  of  civilization  in  Europe  with 
adequate  and  competent  administrators,  and  to 
battle  successfully  with  all  the  nether  forces  which 
had  meanwhile  been  let  loose.  It  is  for  this 
reason  that  I  have  converged  attention  upon 
the  results  of  the  plague  as  an  element  in  shaping 
the  course  of  the  succeeding  centuries. 


APPENDIX    II 

Pope  Honorius  and  the  Monothelites 

The  history  of  the  origin  of  Dogmas  and  of  their 
development  is  one  of  the  most  intricate  inquiries 
which  the  historian  of  Christianity  has  to  face. 
The  theory  which  underlies  what  is  known  as  the 
Rule  of  Faith  has  been  subject  to  many  vicissi- 
tudes. Nothing  is  more  difficult  than  to  answer 
the  question — What  ought  a  Christian  man  to 
believe  ?  and  why  ?  For  a  long  time  it  was 
possible  to  reply  that  a  Christian  man  should  hold 
what  is  taught  by  the  Church.  So  long  as  the 
Church  was  unbroken  and  held  together  by  a 
common  nexus  of  opinions  and  of  ritual  this  view 
was  sustainable.  Presently,  however,  came  a  time 
when  for  various  reasons  the  authority  of  the 
Church  was  denied  and  repudiated  by  large  bodies 
of  the  most  intellectually  powerful  of  Christians. 
They  denied  the  validity  of  an  appeal  to  it  as  the 
final  arbiter  of  Christian  truth,  and  professed  to 
go  behind  the  Church  to  the  Bible.  They  claimed 
that  in  this  book  we  have  the  written  Word  of  God 
directly  inspired  by  Him,  and  further  claimed  that 

its  interpretation  did  not  need  the  help  of  the  Church, 

366 


APPENDIX  II  367 

but  was  within  the  reach  and  compass  of  any  godly 
man.  I  am  not  concerned  with  the  validity  of  this 
claim.  I  am  only  concerned  with  the  new  issue  which 
it  raised,  which  compelled  the  Church  to  justify  itself, 
a  condition  which  had  hitherto  been  unnecessary, 
since  everybody  had  bowed  without  questioning  to 
its  authority.  Not  only  was  it  driven  to  defend 
its  authority  which  had  been  questioned,  but  it  was 
further  constrained  to  define  with  greater  precision 
what  was  the  basis  upon  which  it  proposed  to  stand, 
and  to  justify  its  claim  to  prescribe  for  mankind 
what  they  must  believe  if  they  were  to  be  the 
champions  of  Truth. 

Put  on  its  defence  the  Church  declared  that  its 
authority  was  based  on  two  sources,  namely,  the 
Bible  and  Tradition,  and  not  on  one  alone,  namely, 
the  Bible,  as  those  whom  it  looked  upon  as  its 
rebellious  children  held.  It  claimed,  in  fact,  that 
the  Bible  only  contained  a  tittle  of  the  wisdom 
and  knowledge  which  Christ  and  His  apostles  had 
published,  and  that  much  the  larger  part  of  this 
knowledge  had  been  preserved  and  handed  down, 
not  in  the  written  book,  but  by  a  continuous  tradi- 
tion going  back  to  its  original  fountain  source. 

In  order  to  ascertain  what  the  traditional  view 
was  on  any  subject  in  dispute  a  method  was  devised 
which  was  also  reasonable.  The  bishops  of  the 
various  Sees  of  different  parts  of  the  Christian  world 
were  summoned  to  a  Council.  Each  one  was 
supposed  to  be  a  Trustee  for  the  Faith  and  to  be 
able  to  report  what  had  been  taught  in  his  diocese^ 


368     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Mr.  Percival  has  put  very  clearly  and  usefully  what 
was  the  theory  underlying  these  conciliar  decisions. 
The  question  the  Fathers  considered  was  not  what 
they  supposed  Holy  Scripture  might  mean,  nor 
what  they  from  a  priori  arguments  thought  would 
be  consistent  with  the  mind  of  God,  but  something 
entirely  different,  to  wit,  what  they  had  received  from 
their  fathers.  "  They  understood  their  position  to  be 
that  of  witnesses,  not  of  exegetes.  They  recognised 
but  one  duty  resting  upon  them  in  this  respect — 
to  hand  down  to  other  faithful  men  that  good  thing 
the  Church  had  received  according  to  the  command 
of  God.  The  first  requirement  was  not  learning 
but  honesty.  The  question  they  were  called  upon 
to  answer  was  not.  What  do  I  think  probable,  or 
even  certain,  from  Holy  Scripture?  but,  What  have 
I  been  taught?  What  has  been  entrusted  to  me 
to  hand  down  to  others  ?  When  the  time  came,  in 
the  Fourth  Council,  to  examine  the  Tome  of  Pope 
St.  Leo,  the  question  was  not  whether  it  could  be 
proved  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  assembled  Fathers 
from  Holy  Scripture,  but  whether  it  was  the 
traditional  faith  of  the  Church.  It  was  not  the 
doctrine  of  Leo  in  the  fifth  century,  but  the  doctrine 
of  Peter  in  the  first,  and  of  the  Church  since  then, 
that  they  desired  to  believe  and  to  teach,  "^  and  so, 
when  they  had  studied  the  Tome  they  cried  out : 
"  This  is  the  faith  of  the  Fathers  !  This  is  the  faith 
of  the  Apostles !  .  .  .   Peter  hath  thus  spoken  by 

^  Percival,  the  seven  oecumenical   councils.     Hist.   Note  to   the 
first  (Ecurei.  Council, 


APPENDIX  II  369 

Leo !     The    Apostles    thus     taught !     Cyril    thus 

taught,"    etc.      "This    is    clearly    set    forth,"    adds 

Mr.   Percival,^  "  by   Pope  Vigilius  as  follows  :  No 

one  can  doubt  that  our  fathers  believed  that  they 

should  receive  with  veneration  the  letter  of  blessed 

Leo  if  they  declared  it  to  agree  with  the  doctrines 

of  the  Nicene  and  Constantinopolitan  Councils,  as 

also  with  those  of  blessed  Cyril,  set  forth  in  the  first 

of  Ephesus.     A  nd  if  that  letter  of  so  great  a  Pontiff 

needed  to  be  approved  by  those  comparisons,  how  can 

the  letter  to  Maris  the  Persian,   which  especially 

rejects  the  First  Council  of  Ephesus  and  declares  to 

be  heretical  the  expressed  doctrines   of  the   blessed 

Cyril,  be  believed  to  have  been  called  orthodox  by 

those   same   Fathers,   conde77tning  as   it   does   those 

writings  by  comparison  with  which,  as  we  have  said, 

the   doctrine  of  so  great  a  Pontiff  deserved  to  be 

commendedy^ 

This  expresses  in  clear  language  what  had  in 
substance  been  said  long  before  by  Vincent  of  Lerins, 
who  died  about  450  a.d.,  and  whose  famous  work, 
the  Commofdtorium,  is  one  of  the  most  important 
ecclesiastical  classics.  In  this  he  tells  us  that  an 
appeal  to  Tradition  as  a  source  of  Divine  truth 
would  not  have  been  necessary  had  not  all  the 
leading  heretics  claimed  the  support  of  Holy 
Scripture.'^  In  defining  what  a  genuine  Tradition 
implies,  he  says,  it  must  have  been  believed  every- 
where,   always,    and    by    all     {q2iod    ttbique,     quod 

^  See  Migne,  Ixix.  col.  162.     Percival,  loc.  cit. 
'  Vigilius  Const,  pro.  dam.  Trium  Capitulorum. 
*  Chaps.  I  and  II. 
24 


370     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

semper,  quod  ab  omnibus  creditus  est).  In  other 
words,  we  must  follow  Univei'sitas,  Antiquitas,  Con- 
sensio,  understanding  by  the  last  the  agreement  of 
all,  or  almost  all,  bishops  and  doctors.^ 

It  would  have  been  well,  perhaps,  if  the  estab- 
lishment and  preservation  of  dogmas  had  continued 
to  be  thus  based  (as  the  primitive  theory  required) 
upon  the  Bible  or  upon  Tradition,  in  each  case 
receiving  its  ultimate  warrant  from  the  inspired 
teaching  of  the  Saviour  and  His  apostles. 

Unfortunately  this  method  of  dogmatic  teaching 
did  not  suffice  for  those  who  eventually  shaped  the 
Church's  theology.  The  Greeks,  who  so  largely 
fathered  the  latter,  were  a  good  deal  more  than 
mere  theologians — they  were  keen  philosophers 
steeped  in  the  theories  which  had  been  pursued 
along  different  lines  by  their  acute-minded  pre- 
decessors, the  Sophists  and  their  allies.  They 
were  too  much  imbued  with  the  practice  of 
investigating  the  inner  nature  of  things,  of  causes, 
and  ends,  to  be  content  with  the  simple  dogmas 
of  primitive  belief.  They  proceeded  to  sift  and 
analyse  these  with  extraordinary  dexterity,  not  by 
a  process  of  safe  and  sound  induction,  but  by  a 
very  unsafe  and  dangerous  deductive  method. 
The  process  really  began  with  St.  Paul,  who 
was  a  Greek  in  mind  and  thought,  and  not 
a  Jew.  The  method  was  in  essence  what  is 
known  as  Scholasticism,  viz.  the  application  of  logic 
and    reasoning  to   the   simple  factors  of  primitive 

1  Chap.  II.,  see  Cazenove,  Diet.  Chr.  Biog.,  iv,  1154. 


APPENDIX   II  371 

Faith,  and  thus  building-  up  out  of  them  a  huge 
scheme  of  reasoned  theology.  It  has  been  re- 
peatedly urged  that  Scholasticism  started  in  the 
twelfth  century  with  Anselm  and  others.  This 
seems  to  me  an  entire  mistake.  It  no  doubt 
received  a  great  impetus  from  them,  and  a  still 
greater  impetus  when  Aristode's  works  were  in  laro-e 
part  recovered,  and  when  those  who  used  them  found 
themselves  in  possession  of  a  much  more  powerful 
weapon  for  ratiocination.  In  essence,  however,  this 
later  Scholasticism  was  the  same  as  the  process 
followed  in  embryo  by  St.  Paul.  Once  dogma  became 
the  child  of  dialectics,  instead  of  being  the  product 
of  Faith,  every  kind  of  danger  was  introduced  into 
the  discussion.  Zeno  and  his  scholars  had  taught 
men  to  use  dialectics  in  a  most  subtle  fashion  to 
sustain  almost  any  conclusion,  and  if  there  had 
been  a  free  play  of  discussion  the  whole  of  the  Chris- 
tian Faith  would  have  been  dissolved  into  chaos 
by  the  Dialecticians.  What  happened  was  perhaps 
even  worse  than  chaos.  A  certain  number  of  men 
with  strong  wills  and  aggressive  pens  and  tongues, 
and  endowed  also  with  considerable  gifts,  who  became 
known  in  early  times  as  Fathers  or  "Fathers  of 
the  Church,"  and  who  were  succeeded  by  others 
in  later  times  known  as  Doctors,  were  accepted  as 
the  final  Arbiters  of  the  Faith.  They  had  no 
real  authority  of  any  kind  except  that  which  comes 
from  learning,  character,  or  skill  in  argument. 
These  last  attributes  in  an  age  which  was  getting 
very  barren  in  such  qualities,  secured  for  them  and 


372     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

their  opinions  very  considerable  influence.  So 
much  so  that  they  came  to  be  looked  upon  as  in 
a  measure  inspired,  and  the  results  of  their  meta- 
physical skill  came  to  be  treated  as  Divine  truths. 
Men  were  even  led  to  treat  their  opinions  and  to 
quote  them  as  having  equal  potency  and  authority 
with  the  contents  of  the  Bible,  the  Creeds,  and  the 
pronouncements  of  Councils.  In  a  later  age  the 
obiter  dicta  and  opinions  of  these  Fathers  and 
Doctors  were  collected  by  the  so-called  Masters  of 
the  Sentences,  and  ranged  alongside  of  quotations 
from  the  Bible  as  the  common  material  on  which  the 
great  scheme  of  Theology  was  based  ;  both  being 
treated  as  having  virtually  co-ordinate  authority.  No 
definite  distinction  was  made,  for  instance,  between 
a  pronouncement  by  Thomas  Aquinas  and  a  state- 
ment by  an  Evangelist. 

The  theologians  did  not  claim  that  the  great 
mass  of  these  pronouncements  were  directly  drawn 
from  the  Bible,  but  only  that  they  were  consequen- 
tial, and  followed  as  inevitable  corollaries  from  the 
simpler  truths  enshrined  in  Holy  Writ  or  handed 
down  by  tradition.  This  was  in  many  cases  an 
unjustifiable  pretension,  for  they  were  of  no  more 
real  weight  and  authority  than  other  and  con- 
tradictory deductions  which  could  be  and  were 
derived  from  the  same  premises  by  rival  Fathers 
and  Doctors.  They  were  of  no  more  warrant  again 
than  the  equally  honest,  and  in  many  cases  equally 
irrational,  views  of  others  who  differed  from  them  and 
whom  they  with  great  complacency  styled  heretics. 


APPENDIX  II  373 

That  their  views  eventually  prevailed  was  due  very 
largely  to  accident,  to   persistent    iteration,  to    the 
use  of  illegitimate  methods  of  pressure  or  corruption, 
or    to    the    overwhelming-    votes   of    ignorant    and 
prejudiced  men,  always  at  the  mercy  of  the  most 
fanatical  advocates,  and    always   frightened  at  the 
word    heresy.      No  one  has  ever    defined    what    a 
Father  of  the  Church  is,  or  what  right  or  claim  he 
has  to  define  dogmas  beyond  that  which  is  possessed 
by  any  educated  man  with  trained  reasoning  powers. 
Nevertheless  we  find  that  during  the  earlier  cen- 
turies of  Christianity  a    few   subtle-minded  people 
succeeded  in  imposing  on  the  world  without   any 
authority  a  crowd  of  propositions,    most   of  them 
purely  verbal  and  incapable  of  being   pictured    in 
the  mind,  which  have  been  forced  on  the  Church 
by  an  active  and  aggressive  section  of  it,  a  section 
which  has  arrogated  to  itself  the  sole  claim  to  ortho- 
doxy.    Let  us  now  turn  from  this  rather  abstract 
preface    (which    is    necessary    to    understand    the 
problem),  to  one  more  concrete,  and  try  and  analyse 
a  particular  instance  of  what  I  mean. 

The  incarnation  of  Christ  is  professedly  one 
of  those  mysteries  which,  as  Occam,  the  great 
English  schoolman  who  destroyed  Scholasticism, 
showed  long  ago,  can  only  be  apprehended  by 
Faith,  and  cannot  be  explained  by  any  reasoning 
process.  The  Bible  statements  about  it  are  simple 
enough.  They  tell  us  that  God  became  incarnate, 
in  a  virgin  who  was  made  pregnant  by  the  Holy 
Ghost.     That  statement  cannot  be  made  the  sub- 


374     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

ject-matter    of    deductive    reasoning,    because    its 
elements  are   entirely    outside    all  analogies.       No 
amount  of   dialectic  skill    can    carry    the    question 
further  than  the  original  statement  of  it   in    Holy 
Writ.     The  Union  of  God  and  man  ;  of  the  uncon- 
ditioned, the  infinite,  the  omnipresent,  the  immortal, 
the    all-powerful,    the   all-knowing,    with    the  con- 
ditioned,   the    finite,    the    local,     the    mortal,    the 
frail,    the    ignorant,    etc.,    in    one    person    is    not 
thinkable.     Directly  we  begin  to  try  and  think  or 
write  about  it,   we  begin   to  condition   the   uncon- 
ditioned,   to    define    the    indefinable.      It    may    be 
possible  to  accept  the  simple  words    as   a    phrase 
or  a  definition,  untranslatable  to  our  minds,  and  to 
give  our  assent  to  them  by  Faith  without  pretending 
to  form  a  mental  picture  of  what  they  mean,  but 
further  we  cannot  go,  for  we  cannot  transcend  our 
own  thought. 

It  has  been  the  object  of  Scholasticism  in  this, 
as  in  other  cases,  to  try  and  pierce  this  solid  wall 
which  2"irdles  our  thought  about  and  limits  our 
human  horizon  in  such  issues,  and  to  try  and 
transcend  both  thought  and  consciousness,  and  to 
take  us  into  a  transcendental  metaphysical  world. 
It  has  further  been  the  continual  effort  of  the 
orthodox,  as  they  call  themselves,  to  insist  upon  all 
men  with  their  lips,  declaring  that  they  accept  one 
alleged  deduction  from  some  particular  dogmatic 
definition  rather  than  another.  They  have  gone 
further,  and  have  demanded  from  the  orthodox  that 
they  shall  suppress  every  alternative  pronouncement 


APPENDIX  II  375 

under  penalty  of  fire  and  sword,  and  have  put  to  death 
with  cruel  torture  myriads  of  men  and  women  in  the 
process.  The  attempt  has  not  only  entirely  failed  in 
producing  uniformity  of  opinion,  butwe  are  not  a  whit 
nearer  a  solution  of  these  everlasting  paradoxes  as  a 
consequence  of  the  gigantic  mass  of  sophistry  which 
is  known  as  Scholasticism.  No  bridge  has  been 
found  anywhere  to  traverse  the  gulf  between  infinity 
and  what  is  finite,  between  what  has  conditions  and 
what  has  none.  No  interpreter  has  succeeded  in 
really  translating  into  rational  thought  ideas  and 
conditions  which  ex  hypothesi  cannot  be  compre- 
hended by  reason.  The  notion  that  any  legitimate 
solution  is  feasible  betrays,  in  fact,  a  stupendous 
ignorance  of  the  very  elements  of  thought  and 
consciousness. 

Let  us  see  what  really  happened  in  the  case  we 
are  discussing.  Instead  of  leaving  the  mystery  as 
it  appears  in  the  Bible,  and  merely  affirming  the 
Incarnation  as  an  ineffable  and  unthinkable  union  of 
the  Divine  and  human,  the  ever  restless  and 
unsatisfied  minds  of  the  Greeks  proceeded  to  refine, 
discriminate,  and  build  up  a  quite  fantastic  super- 
structure, fantastic  because  unwarranted  by  the  pos- 
sibilities of  any  legitimate  logical  process.  Thus  a 
number  of  theories  contradictory  or  inconsistent 
with  each  other  arose,  all  of  them  being  attempts 
to  transcend  human  experience,  and  none  of  which, 
whether  dubbed  orthodox  or  heterodox,  had  the 
slightest  claim  to  be  pronounced  true  or  false.  No 
human  tribunal  being  competent  to  try  the  issue. 


376     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Among  these  transcendental  puzzles,  perhaps 
the  one  that  caused  the  greatest  heat  and  the  most 
wideworld  consequences  was  the  question  of  the  real 
nature  of  the  God-man  Christ. 

The  Nestorians  had  maintained  that  in  Christ 
there  were  two  distinct  hypostases  or  persons  (as 
the  Latins  translated  the  evasive  term),  one  human 
and  the  other  Divine,  which  were  both  perfect. 
This  view  was  pronounced  to  be  heretical  by  the 
Fathers  who  dominated  the  Council  of  Ephesus  in 
431,  as  more  or  less  involving  two  Christs,  two  Sons 
of  God,  etc.  At  the  other  extreme,  another  set  of 
writers  insisted  that  the  parentage  of  Christ  involved 
similar  conditions  to  those  of  man,  and  that  the 
natures  of  the  father  and  mother  were  merged  in  the 
offspring,  and  did  not  continue  to  exist  as  separate 
or  separable  entities  in  Him.  Such  was  the  view  of 
one  of  the  most  powerful  sects,  hence  named  Mono- 
physites.  The  view  was  repudiated  by  the  section 
which  eventually  dominated  the  position,  and  which 
was  treated  as  orthodox.  This  latter  section  main- 
tained the  unthinkable  position  that  the  God-man, 
although  he  was  "one"  in  essence,  comprised  two 
separate  and  separable  persons,  one  human,  and 
partaking  of  all  the  qualities  of  2,  perfect  man  (that 
is  to  say,  of  such  a  man  as  never  existed  in  all  time  : 
for  the  definition  of  man  implies  a  man  subject  to 
frailty,  error,  sin,  and  other  limitations),  and  a 
perfect  God  bound  by  no  limitations  and  undefinable. 
These  two  persons  were  supposed  to  coexist  in  the 
God-man  without  one  interfering  or  trenching  on 


APPENDIX  II  377 

the  other,  and  )et  without  friction  or  diversity  of 
thought  or  purpose. 

In  either  case  the  opinion  was  really  quite 
immaterial  for  simple  men,  who  could  not  even 
understand  the  problem,  since  there  was  no  authority 
under  heaven  which  could  finally  decide  a  meta- 
physical issue  like  this,  based,  as  so  many 
others  are  based,  on  purely  transcendental  argu- 
ments entirely  beyond  the  reach  of  legitimate 
dialectics. 

Both  theories  were  equally  unthinkable,  and 
neither  of  them  had  the  slightest  moral  purpose 
or  interest.  The  feud  between  the  Orthodox,  as 
they  called  themselves,  and  the  Monophysites  was 
the  more  bitter  and  furious  because  it  was  about 
a  mere  metaphysical  and  not  a  real  issue,  one  too 
which  the  crowd  could  not  even  comprehend  and 
which  the  champions  on  each  side  found  the  greatest 
difficulty  in  expressing  in  rational  language.  What 
was  really  fought  about  was  a  form  of  words 
emptied  of  any  comprehensible  meaning  and  which 
thus  became  a  real  shibboleth.  On  both  sides 
there  was  the  same  infirmity,  namely,  an  attempt 
to  define  a  mystery  which  could  not  be  compre- 
hended by  reason,  and  which,  as  presented  by  the 
Scriptures,  appealed  to  faith  only  and  not  to  logic. 
All  that  can  be  said  about  it  is,  that  if  (which  is 
not  the  case)  the  analogy  of  human  nature  is  of 
any  value  whatever,  in  the  settlement  of  such  a 
problem,  the  Monophysites  had  much  the  best  of 
the    argument   since    they   did    appeal    to   human 


378     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

experience.  The  case  on  the  other  side  was 
sustained  by  quite  illegitimate  and  sophistical 
arguments,  in  which  the  validity  of  the  deduction 
was  entirely  destroyed  by  being  based  on  purely 
arbitrary  and  unverified  postulates. 

While  the  furious  combatants  on  each  side 
fought  most  fiercely  about  their  empty  shibboleths, 
which  could  not  be  translated  into  thought,  the 
Empire  was  being  sapped  by  the  hatred  and  feud 
which  was  thereby  engendered  among  its  subjects, 
and  presently,  as  we  have  seen,  the  feud  was  the 
main  cause  of  the  collapse  which  took  place  when 
half  the  Christian  world  was  destroyed  by  the 
Muhammedans, 

It  is  not  wonderful  that  the  Emperor  Heraclius, 
who  at  that  time  was  in  the  full  strength  of  his 
mental  and  bodily  vigour,  should  have  been  very 
anxious  to  piece  the  rent  in  the  community  which 
was  undoing  his  Empire  and  to  bring  the  Orthodox 
and  the  Monophysites,  who  were  very  numerous, 
into  one  fold.  His  friend  Sergius,  the  Patriarch 
of  Constantinople,  also  a  man  of  far-seeing  views, 
was  of  the  same  mind  with  himself.  The  latter 
presently  informed  his  master  that  his  own  pre- 
decessor, Mennas,  in  one  of  his  writings  had  put 
forward  a  formula  which  he  thought  might  be 
accepted  by  the  Monophysites  as  a  reasonable 
and  acceptable  compromise.  This  formula,  while 
conceding  two  natures  in  Christ,  postulated  a 
single  operative  will,  Oekrjfjba,  which  he  called 
a  divine-human  energy,  /jlU  evepjeia  S"  dvSpiKri.     It 


APPENDIX  II  379 

seemed  to  him,  as  it  surely  seems  to  any  person 
who  will  analyze  the  problem,  that  in  regard 
to  the  will  it  is  impossible  to  understand  how 
Christ  can  have  two  wills,  a  Divine  will  and  a 
human  will,  working  with  complete  independence, 
and  each  with  complete  potency.  The  very 
essence  of  a  will  is  that  it  shall  be  free.  To 
postulate  the  existence  of  two  free  wills  in  one 
person,  where  neither  shall  be  constrained  and 
dominated  by  the  other,  is  to  postulate  an  un- 
workable machine  as  the  operative  part  of  thought 
and  conviction.  Even  those  who  pressed  the  view 
allowed  that  the  two  wills  must  always  act  in 
unison  and  never  conflict  with  one  another,  a 
concession  which  really  made  their  contention 
a  mere  verbal  one,  as  so  many  dogmatic  pro- 
nouncements in  fact  are.^ 

^  This  may  be  illustrated  by  a  paragraph  from  the  Definition  of 
Faith  made  at  the  Council  of  Constantinople  in  680,  where  we  read  : 
"We  declare  that  in  Him  "  {i.e.  in  Christ)  "are  two  natural  wills,  .  .  . 
and  these  two  natural  wills  are  not  contrary  one  to  the  other  (God 
forbid  !),  as  the  impious  heretics  assert,  but  His  human  will  follows, 
and  that  not  as  resisting  and  reluctant,  but  rather  as  subject  to  His 
Divine  and  Omnipotent  Will."  Can  verbal  distinctions  without  real 
meaning  go  further  ? 

It  will  not  be  uninteresting  to  quote  another  passage  on  this  subject 
from  a  very  modern  writer,  who  has  great  authority  among  English 
Roman  Catholics,  namely,  Mr.  Luke  Rivington,  to  show  what  a 
quagmire  of  mere  meaningless  verbiage  can  be  imposed  upon 
us  as  genuine  psychology  by  an  able  man  who  sees  theological 
questions  through  a  smoked  glass.  He  says:  " Further,  there  is  in 
our  Lord's  human  nature  what  is  sometimes  called  the  will  of  the 
reason  and  the  will  of  the  senses,  but  between  the  two  there  is  not, 
and  there  cannot  be,  contrariety.  In  the  Agony  the  will  of  the  senses 
expressed  itself,  but  was  incapable  of  disobedience,  for  it  was  not 
wounded  by  the  fall,  and  it  was  the  will  of  the  Eternal  Word.  There 
was  no  triumph  of  one  over  the  other,  for  there  was  no  rebellion,  no 
faintest  wish  that  it  might  be  otherwise.     In  a  word,  the  operation  of 


380     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Having  framed  the  formula,  the  Patriarch  Sergius 
communicated  it  to  the  other  Patriarchs  and  to 
the  heads  of  the  so-called  Monophysite  schism,  and 
those  associated  with  them.  It  met  with  a  very 
satisfactory  welcome,  and  it  looked  as  if  Mono- 
thelism,  as  it  was  called,  was  going  to  bring  peace 
and  ""oodwill  to  the  fiohting-  sects. 

It  was  accepted  by  Severus  the  champion  of 
the  Monophysites,  and  by  the  Jacobite  Patriarch 
Anastasius.  While  among  the  orthodox,  Cyrus, 
Bishop  of  Phasis,  who  became  Patriarch  of  Alex- 
andria, and  the  Patriarch  of  Antioch,  both  con- 
curred. The  action  of  the  Pope  was  more 
significant  and  more  far-reaching.  His  view  of 
the  position  was  contained  in  two  very  friendly 
and  sympathetic  letters  written  to  Sergius. 

These  letters  of  Honorius  were  apparently  not 
known  at  Rome,  or  the  copies  of  them,  if  any,  had 
been  lost.  They  were  only  published  to  the  world 
by  the  Council  of  Constantinople  in  680,  a  Council 
specially  called  to  settle  the  differences  on  the  subject 
of  Monothelism,  and  entirely  manoeuvred  so  as  to 
secure  its  adhesion  to  the  Roman  view,  and  where, 
therefore,    it   would   be   the   interest  of  those  who 

the  human  will  (with  its  two  departments)  is  distinct  from  the  operation 
of  the  divine  in  the  same  Person  of  the  Word,  but  while  distinct, 
incapable  of  contrariety."  What  is  this?  Is  it  philosophy?  is  it 
theology  ?  is  it  capable  of  being  thought  ?  Is  this  stuff  really  accepted 
in  Roman  seminaries  as  part  of  the  Divine  Wisdom  imparted  to 
simple  men  by  Christ  and  His  apostles,  or  merely  a  handful  of 
cobwebs  from  a  disordered  brain  trying  to  give  form  to  a  nightmare, 
and  imposed  on  simple  men  without  any  authority  under  heaven,  by 
a  private  and  lay  member  of  a  Church  which  repudiates  all  exercise  of 
private  judgment  as  pernicious  in  those  outside  its  fold  ? 


APPENDIX  II  381 

controlled  the  Council  to  keep  the  letters  of 
Honorius  dark  if  possible. 

The  genuineness  of  the  letters  has  been 
questioned  by  some  Roman  Catholic  apologists 
of  obscure  reputation,  such  as  Gravina,  Coster, 
Stapleton,  Wiggers,  Bartoli,  and  Ughi,  but  this 
is  no  longer  the  case.  Thus  Father  Mann  in  the 
latest  history  of  the  Popes,  says  :  "  Contrary  to 
the  opinion  of  some  Catholic  writers,  the  letters 
are  here  allowed  to  be  genuine  and  incorrupt.  .  .  . 
This  is  in  accordance  with  nearly  all  the  best 
Catholic  writers."  He  then  quotes  Hefele,  Hist, 
of  the  Councils,  v.  p.  56  seq.,  p.  191  of  the 
English  translation.^  He  might  also  have  quoted 
Pennachi's  monograph  entitled,  De  Honorii  I. 
Rotnani  Pontificis,  causa  in  Concilio  VI.,  or,  still 
more  effectively,  the  Jesuit  Grisar's  Analecta. 

Dollinger,  writing  on  the  same  side,  also  makes 
an  effective  reply.  "Seeing,"  he  says,  "that  the 
letters  of  Honorius  were  laid  before  the  Council,* 
examined  and  condemned  in  the  presence  of  the 
papal  legates  (who  at  any  rate  must  have  known 
their  contents),  it  was  found  necessary  to  abandon 
this  method  of  getting  out  of  the  difficulty."  Even 
if  they  had  been  forged,  a  supreme  difficulty  would 
still  remain.  It  has  been  overlooked  by  the 
champions  of  Papal  Infallibility  that  the  Pope  did  not 
stand  alone  in  the  matter.  The  doctrine  of  Papal 
Infallibility  was  quite  unknown  at  the  beginning 
of  the  seventh  century,  and  at  that  date  the  pro- 

^  See  Mann,  op.  cit.  i.  p.  337.  ^  i.e.  the  Council  of  680. 


382      SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

nouncement  of  one  Patriarch  was  as  good  and  as 
authoritative  as  that  of  another,  and  Honorius  in  his 
action  really  stood  alongside  of  his  three  brother 
Patriarchs  who  had  co-ordinate  jurisdiction  and 
authority  with  himself.  We  must  therefore  very 
largely  extend  the  area  of  forgery  if  we  are  to 
include  them.  The  fact  is,  the  suggestion  of  forgery 
in  this  case  is  based  on  no  single  fact  or  reason 
except  the  supposed  necessity  of  saving  the  face 
of  an  infallible   Pope. 

The  original  copies  of  these  letters  in  Latin,  says 
Hefele,  are  no  longer  extant,  but  we  still  possess  the 
Greek  translation  which  was  read  at  the  sixth 
oecumenical  Council,  was  then  compared  by  a 
Roman  delegate  with  the  Latin  originals  still  extant 
in  the  patriarchal  archives  at  Constantinople  and 
found  to  be  correct.  From  the  Greek  translation  two 
old  Latin  versions  were  made,  which  are  printed  in 
Mansi  and  Hardouin.  Of  these,  the  first  was  doubt- 
less prepared  by  the  Roman  Librarian  Anastasius.^ 

In  his  letter  the  Pope  makes  a  sharp  distinction 
between  what  the  Greeks  called  OeXTjixa  and  ivipyeia, 
(translated  operatio  by  the  Latins),  i.e.  the  will  and 
its  operative  and  resultant  action.  It  has  been 
urged  that  he  did  not  quite  understand  the  subtlety 
of  the  distinction  as  defined  by  the  Greeks.  This 
seems  to  me  very  improbable.  There  were  plenty 
of  Greeks  at  Rome  at  this  time  who  could  help 
him  even  if  he  had  not  been  the  scholar  he  was. 
In  his  letters  Honorius  disputed  the  formula  of 
^  Hefele,  Councils,  Eng.  ed.  v.  28. 


APPENDIX  II  383 

Sergius  in  one  respect,  and  declared  that  he  held  it 
not  to  be  correct  to  say  there  were  only  one  or 
two,  or  any  specified  number  of  ways  by  which  the 
decision  of  the  will  could  be  put  into  operation,  but 
many  ways  [TroXvTpoirai'i),  and  he  therefore  deemed 
it  idle  to  discuss  that  subject  and  advised  that 
discussion  on  it  should  cease.  The  words  of  the 
Latin  translation  are  worth  quoting  as  they  stand. 
Utrtmi  a2ite'ni propter  opera  divinitatiset  humanitatis, 
U7ia,  an  gemmae  operationes  debeant  derivatae  dicivel 
intelligi,  ad  nos  ista pertinere  non  debent,  relinqzientes 
eagranimaticis,  quisolent  parvulis  exquisita  derivajido 
no77iina  venditare.  Nos  enini  non  unam  operationem 
vel  duas  Dominum  Jesuin  Christum,  ejusque  sanctum. 
Spiritum,  sacris  littcris  percepimus,  sed  multi- 
formiter  cognovimtis  operatum'' 

So  much  for  the  operations  of  the  will,  now  for  the 
will  itself,  deKt^ixa,  which  was  the  real  issue  ;  that  upon 
which  the  subsequent  trouble  arose,  namely,  as  to 
the  unity  or  duality  of  Christ's  "  will"  Upon  this  the 
language  of  Honorius  is  as  precise  and  explicit  as  it 
can  well  be.     I  will  give  it  both  in  its  Greek  and  Latin 

form  :  oOev  koI  ev  deXrjfia  ofioXoyov/xev  rov  Kvpiov  ^Irjcrou 
XpiGTov  ;  in  Latin,  luide  et  zmamvoluniate^n  fatemur 
Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi^  (i.e.  whence  also,  we 
confess  one  Will  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ).  N  othing 
can  be  plainer. 

Not  only  so,  but  he  made  an  express  reply  to 
those  who  quoted  the  two  critical  texts  relied  upon 
by  the  other  side,  namely,  "  I  came  not  to  do  mine 

*  lb.  29. 


384     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

own  will,  but  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,"  and 
"  Not  my  will,  but  thine  be  done,"  which  he  declared 
should  be  taken  in  a  figurative  sense  only,  and  that 
Christ  meant  the  two  phrases  merely  as  an  ex- 
hortation to  us  to  submit  our  wills  to  the  divine 
will,  which  was  apparently  the  very  argument  used 
by  the  Monophysite  Severus  in  the  same  behalf. 
Others  have  urged  that  the  Fathers  at  the  Council 
misunderstood  the  meaning  of  Honorius  when  they 
condemned  him  as  a  heretic.  This  is  treating  the 
one  hundred  and  seventy-four  members  of  the 
Synod  who  signed  its  Acts  and  who  were  all 
Bishops  with  very  scant  courtesy.  They  condemned 
the  letters  of  Honorius  after  examining  them,  and 
ordered  them  to  be  burnt.  Apart  from  this,  the 
very  words  of  Honorius  in  regard  to  the  single 
will,  which  I  have  quoted  above,  are  as  plain  and 
clear  as  they  can  be  made,  and  the  majority 
of  those  who  have  discussed  these  passages, 
especially  those  who  are  more  directly  responsible 
for  the  pronouncement  on  Papal  Infallibility,  have 
overlooked  what  the  declaration  of  the  Pope 
really  meant.  It  will  be  remembered  that  up  to 
this  date  there  had  been  no  official  or  authoritative 
pronouncement  on  the  subject  of  Monothelism,  the 
particular  issues  had  not  been  raised  and  decided 
by  any  authoritative  body.  There  were  certain 
obiter  dicta  of  individual  scholars,  but  so  far  as  I 
know  there  had  been  no  definite  pronouncement 
as  to  what  was  or  was  not  the  orthodox  view. 
The  Pope  seems  to  say  this   in  another  clause  of 


APPENDIX  II  385 

his  letter,  thus,  Non  opertet  ad  dogmata  haec 
ecclesiastica  7^etorquere,  quae  neque  synodales  apices 
super  hoc  exaiizinantes,  neque  auctoritates  canonicae 
visae  sunt  explanasse,  tit  unam  vel  duas  energias 
aliquis  p7'aesuniat  Christi  Dei praedicare,  quas  neque 
evangelicae  vel  apostolicae  literae,  neque  synodalis 
examinatio  super  his  habita,  visae  stmt  terminasse, 
nisi  fortassis,  sicut  praefati  stmtus,  quidam  aliqua 
balbtitiendo  docuerunt,  condiscendentes  ad  informan- 
das  vientes,  atqtie  intelligentias  parvulorum,  quae 
ad  ecclesiastica  dogmata  Iraki  non  debent,  quae 
unusqtiisqtie  in  sensu  suo  abundans,  videttir  secundtim 
propriam  sententiam  explicare} 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  Pope  Honorius, 
together  with  the  other  Patriarchs,  were  the  first 
authoritative  persons  who  defined  the  orthodox 
position  on  the  subject  of  Monothelism  v.  Duo- 
thelism  ;  and  further,  that  if  we  accept  his  own  plain 
and  unqualified  language  as  it  stands,  we  must  admit 
that  he,  with  the  other  Patriarchs,  accepted  Mono- 
thelism as  the  orthodox  faith.  This,  as  we  shall  see, 
was  also  the  opinion  of  his  immediate  successors  on 
the  Papal  throne  and  of  the  Church  both  East  and 
West.  A  more  powerful  Court  to  decide  such  a 
question  it  would  be  impossible  to  conceive,  except 
the  decision  of  a  general  Council,  and  it  certainly- 
committed  the  Church  most  completely  to  Mono- 
thelism. From  such  a  decision,  it  seems  to  me, 
the  champions  of  Papal  infallibility  cannot  appeal 
without  rebelling  against  the  Vatican  Council. 

^  Migne,  P.L.  xxxvii.  474. 
25 


386     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Meanwhile,  precisely  in  accordance  with  the 
views  of  Honorius  as  set  out  in  his  first  letter  to 
Sergius,  the  latter  drew  up  a  pronouncement  which 
was  called  an  Ecthesis,  in  which  it  was  forbidden  to 
discuss  the  question  of  a  single  or  a  double 
"energy"  or  operation;  while  in  regard  to  the 
"Will  of  Christ"  it  was  declared  to  be  a  single 
one  only.  This  Ecthesis  was  officially  issued  in 
the  name  of  the  Emperor  and  was  confirmed  by  a 
Synod  assembled  under  Sergius  at  the  end  of  638.^ 
Soon  after  which  both  Sergius  and  Honorius  died. 

While  all  the  patriarchs  were  united  as 
champions  of  Monothelism  and  their  decision  was 
confirmed  by  a  Synod  at  Constantinople,  a  sharp 
opponent  to  it  arose  in  the  person  of  the  monk 
Sophronios.  The  fact  that  Sophronios  and  another 
monk  named  Maximus  were  the  great  protagonists 
of  the  opposition  to  Monothelism  seems  to  show  that, 
as  Mil  man  long  ago  suggested,  the  movement  was 
in  substance  a  Monkish  one,  and  that  the  result 
was  the  first  great  victory  gained  by  the  Regulars 
over  the  Seculars.  This  meant  a  victory  of  monks 
who  were  not  in  Orders  and  merely  laymen  under 
vows,  against  a  Pope,  against  all  the  Patriarchs,  and 
against  a  general  Synod  of  the  Church,  a  position 
that  is  positively  ridiculous  when  we  remember  that 
they  in  fact  succeeded  in  forcing  their  unauthorised 
view  upon  the  Church.  Sophronios  aroused  the 
fanaticism  of  the  crowd  by  raising  the  popular  cry 
that  the  proposed  peace  was  to  be  purchased  by 

^  Mansi,  x.  1000. 


APPENDIX  II  387 

a  complete  surrender  to  the  hated  Monophysites, 
by  arousing  jealousies  of  the  Constantinople  Church 
among  the  Latins,  and  by  raising  the  cry  of  heresy, 
which  in  Italy  at  that  time  was  easily  believed,  since 
the  Latin  Church  was  then  sunk  in  torpor  and 
ignorance.  The  forces  of  the  secular  power  and 
the  influence  of  three  of  the  Greek  patriarchs 
quietened  Sophronios  for  a  while  and  misled  the 
Emperor,  who  appointed  him  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem. 
He  thereupon  began  his  furious  campaign  afresh. 

In  previous  pages  I  have  described  what 
happened  at  Rome  after  the  death  of  Honorius. 
He  was  succeeded  successively  by  Severinus  and 
John  the  4th,  neither  of  whom  apparently  took  part 
in  the  disputes  about  Monothelism,  the  contrary 
opinion  being,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  based  on  a 
mistake.^  John  was  in  turn  succeeded  by  a 
Greek  named  Theodore,  whose  father  had  been 
Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  who  was  himself  a 
friend  and  adherent  of  Sophronios  and  had  perhaps 
been  a  monk.  He  was  attached  to  the  latter's 
views  on  Monothelism. 

Meanwhile  the  Emperor  Constans  the  2nd, 
succeeded  to  the  throne  of  Constantinople,  and 
apparently  at  the  instance  of  his  Patriarch  Paul, 
withdrew  the  Ecthesis  which  had  been  issued  under 
the  segis  of  Heraclius  and  substituted  for  it  another 
document  called  the  Type}  Theodore  died  in  649. 
Thereupon  it  would  appear  that  the  bishops  and 
priests  at  Rome  who  had   been  worked  upon  by 

*  Vide  ante,  pp.  290-293.  '  Ante,  pp.  206,  207. 


388     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

the  monks  and  who  were  opposed  to  Monothelism 
proceeded  to  elect  Martin,  a  famous  champion  of 
the  two  wills  (that  is,  of  a  heresy,  according  to  the 
only  decision  of  the  Church  at  the  time).  He  was 
consecrated  without  the  Emperor's  consent  having 
been  obtained  to  his  election,  and  was  thus  de  jure 
not  a  Pope  at  all/ 

Martin  proceeded  to  summon  a  provincial 
Council  at  Rome,  to  which  he  gave  the  name  of 
"  General,"  but  which  was  in  reality  only  an  Italian 
provincial  Council,  and  did  this  without  the 
knowledge  of  the  Emperor,  to  whom  the  right  alone 
belonged  of  summoning  every  legitimate  Council. 
At  this  quite  irregular  Latin  synod,  which  met  on 
the  5th  of  October  649,  the  Monothelite  prelates 
Theodore  of  Pharan,  Cyrus  patriarch  of  Alexandria, 
Sergius,  Pyrrhus,  and  Paul,  patriarchs  of  Constanti- 
nople, were  condemned  and  anathematised  as 
supporters  of  Monothelism,  while  the  Imperial  edicts, 
the  Ecthesis  and  the  Type,  were  styled  impious  and 
declared  inoperative.  The  result  of  all  this  quite 
arbitrary  action  was  that  the  election  of  Martin  as 
Pope  was  declared  void  on  the  ground  of  its 
irregularity,  not  by  the  Emperor  only,  but  by  the 
Roman  clergy,  who  deposed  him  and  elected  his 
successor.  This  clearly  made  all  the  acts  of  his 
reign,  including  those  of  his  Roman  synod,  also  void. 
Martin  was  removed  to  Cherson,  and  a  fresh  Pope, 
Eugenius  the  4th,  was  elected  in  his  place  by  the 
bishops  and  clergy  of  Rome,  and  he  was  duly  con- 

1  Vide  ante,  pp.  298,  299. 


APPENDIX  II  389 

secrated  after  his  election  had  been  confirmed  by 
the  Emperor/ 

It  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  the  Patriarch  Paul  in 
writing  to  Martin's  predecessor,  Theodore,  justifying 
his  adhesion  to  Monothelism,  stated  that  "  he  had 
followed  the  doctrine  of  Honorius,"  who  was  in  fact 
as  much  committed  to  that  opinion  as  any  of  the  four 
Eastern  prelates  who  had  been  anathematised  by 
the  Synod  of  Rome.  The  name  of  Honorius  does 
not  appear,  however,  among  those  denounced  at 
the  latter  synod.  Probably  the  fact  of  Honorius 
having  already  compromised  the  position  was  not 
known  there,  and  perhaps  if  it  had  been  the  Roman 
Synod  would  not  have  been  held. 

Let  us  now  pass  on  a  few  years.  Milman  sug- 
gests that  by  the  exertions  of  the  Eastern  Monks  a 
considerable  change  had  recently  taken  place  in 
the  view  of  the  Eastern  Church  on  Monothelism. 

The  Emperor  Constantine  Pogonatos  (663-685) 
seems  to  have  been  as  anxious  to  reunite  the 
broken  fragments  of  the  Church  as  his  predecessor 
Heraclius.  If  he  was  to  do  so,  however,  It  was  neces- 
sary that  he  should  conciliate  the  Latin  Church, 
which  after  the  conquests  of  the  Muhammedans 
had  become  relatively  much  more  important,  and 
where  the  monks  were  all-powerful.  He  found 
the  Church  of  Constantinople,  which  had  become 
most  Erastian,  very  complacent,  and  ready  to 
turn  its  back  on  the  views  it  had  maintained 
when  the  Ecthesis  and  the  Type  were  issued. 

^  Vide  anlc,  pp.  300-306. 


390     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

On  the  7th  of  November  680,  Constantine 
caused  to  be  summoned  at  Constantinople  what  is 
known  as  the  6th  QEcumenical  Council,  which  was 
attended  by  nearly  three  hundred  bishops,  of  whom 
174  signed  its  Acts.  At  this  Council,  which  was 
presided  over  in  person  by  the  Emperor,  all  the 
five  patriarchs  were  represented.  The  repre- 
sentatives of  Pope  Agatho  were  seated  on  the 
left  of  the  Emperor.  The  Pope  himself  was 
summoned  to  the  Council  as  "the  most  holy  and 
blessed  archbishop  of  Old  Rome  and  oecumenical 
Pope,"  and  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  as  "  the 
most  holy  and  blessed  Archbishop  of  Constantinople 
and  oecumenical  Patriarch." 

In  his  letter  to  the  Emperor,  Agatho  enumerates 
the  delegates  whom  he  had  sent  to  the  Constantino- 
politan  Council.  These  he  styles  "our  fellow-serv- 
ants, Abundantius,  John,  and  John ;  ourmost  reverend 
brother  bishops,  Theodore  and  George  ;  our  most 
beloved  sons  and  presbyters,  with  our  most  beloved 
son  John,  a  deacon,  Constantine  a  sub-deacon 
of  this  holy  spiritual  mother,  the  Apostolic  See, 
as  well  as  Theodore  the  presbyter  legate  of  the 
holy  Church  of  Ravenna,  and  the  religious  servants 
of  God,  the  monks.^  Mark  this  phrase :  What 
legitimate  place  had  Monks  at  a  Council  according 
to  the  traditions  of  the  Church  ?  The  Pope  was 
therefore  well  represented  at  the  Council.  His 
legates  and  representatives  signed  its  acts  and  took 
them  back  with  them  to  Rome. 

^  Percival,  op.  cit.  329. 


APPENDIX  II  391 

The  four  representatives  of  the  Pope  signed 
themselves  "John,  an  humble  deacon  of  the  holy 
Roman  Church,  and  holding  the  place  of  the  Most 
holy  Agatho,  oecumenical  Pope  of  the  City  of  Rome  ;" 
"John,  by  the  mercy  of  God,  bishop  of  the  City  of 
Thessalonica,  and  legate  of  the  Apostolic  See  of 
Rome;"  "John,  the  unworthy  bishop  of  Portus, 
legate  of  the  whole  Council  of  the  Holy  Apostolic 
See  of  Rome;"  "Stephen,  by  the  mercy  of  God, 
bishop  of  Corinth,  and  legate  of  the  Apostolic  See 
of  Old  Rome." 

The  Council  beean  with  the  reading  of  a  letter 
from  the  Pope  in  answer  to  the  Emperor's 
invitation  [sacra),  reciting  that  during  the  previous 
forty-six  years  certain  novelties  contrary  to 
the  orthodox  faith  had  been  introduced  by  those 
who  at  various  times  had  been  bishops  of  the 
Imperial  city,  namely,  Sergius,  Paul,  Pyrrhus,  and 
Peter,  by  Cyrus  at  one  time  Archbishop  of 
Alexandria,  and  by  Theodore  Bishop  of  Pharan, 
against  which  novelties  he,  Agatho,  had  persistently 
prayed  ;  he  begged  that  those  who  shared  these 
views  in  the  most  Holy  Church  of  Constantinople 
might  explain  what  was  their  source. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  Pope's  representatives 
do  not  here  name  Honorius,  another  proof  that  the 
existence  of  the  letters  of  that  Pope  were  not  then 
known  at  Rome.  To  the  letter  of  Pope  Agatho 
the  Monothelites  present  protested  that  they  had 
brought  forward  no  new  method  of  speech,  but 
had  taught  what  they  had  received  from  the  Holy 


392     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

CEcumenical  Synods,  as  well  from  the  archbishops  of 
"this  Imperial  city,"  to  wit,  Sergius,  Paul,  Pyrrhus, 
and  Peter,  as  also  from  Honorius  who  was  Pope  of 
Old  Rome,  and  from  Cyrus  who  was  Pope  of 
Alexandria,  that  is  to  say,  In  reference  to  the 
Divine  Will  and  its  operation,  and  so  we  believe 
and  so  we  preach,  and  we  are  ready  to  stand  by 
and  defend  this  faith/  The  mention  of  Honorius 
in  this  protest  was  probably  a  revelation  and  a 
great  surprise  to  the  Papal  delegates. 

At  the  fourth  session  of  the  Council  a  letter 
from  Pope  Agatho  addressed  to  the  Emperor,  and 
to  Heraclius,  and  Tiberius  Augustus,  setting  out  at 
considerable  length  the  case  of  those  who  held  the 
doctrine  of  two  Wills,  and  appending  a  catena  of 
passages  from  the  Greek  Fathers  was  read.^ 

Then  followed  a  similar  letter  addressed  to  the 
same  three  high  personages  from  Pope  Agatho 
and  a  synod  of  125  bishops  which  had  met  at 
Rome,  which  claimed  to  represent  the  views  of  the 
Lombards,  Slavs,  Franks,  French  {sic)  Goths,  and 
Britons,  and  further  claimed  that  these  views  repre- 
sented the  traditional  faith  as  set  forth  in  the 
Council  presided  over  by  St.  Martin,  the  forlorn 
character  of  which  I  have  already  described.^ 

After  the  reading  of  these  letters  the  Emperor 
asked  George,  Archbishop  of  Constantinople,  and 

^  Labbe  and  Cossart,  Con.  vi.  col.  609,  etc. 

-  A  more  extraordinary  specimen  of  inept  logic,  sophistical  use 
of  irrelevant  analogies,  and  mere  puerilities  than  this  letter  it 
would  be  difficult  to  find. 

*  Percival,  op.  cit.  340-41. 


APPENDIX  II  393 

Macarius,  Archbishop  of  Antioch,  and  their 
suffragans,  to  say  if  they  accepted  the  views  set 
out  by  Agatho  and  by  his  Synod.  The  former 
on  behalf  of  himself  and  his  bishops,  except  only 
Theodore  of  Miletus  (who  handed  in  his  assent  at 
the  tenth  session),  declared  that  they  accepted  the 
Pope's  letter  and  its  contents ;  an  excellent  example 
of  the  utterly  Erastian  character  of  the  Church  of 
Constantinople  at  this  time,  for  it  really  meant 
entirely  reversing  the  previous  decision  of  the 
Church.  On  the  other  hand  Macarius,  the 
Patriarch  of  Antioch,  replied,  "I  do  not  say  that 
there  are  two  wills  or  two  operations  in  the 
dispensation  of  the  incarnation  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  but  one  will  and  one  theandric 
operation." 

At  the  thirteenth  session  of  the  Council, 
sentence  was  pronounced  against  the  Monothelites. 
In  the  document  containing  this  sentence  the  Fathers 
at  the  Council  declared  that  they  had  reconsidered 
the  letters  of  Sergius,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople ; 
Cyrus,  Bishop  of  Phasis  ;  Honor ms,  sometime  Pope 
of  Old  Rome,  as  well  as  the  letter  of  the  latter  to 
the  same  Sergius^  and  declared  that  these  documents 
were  quite  foreign  to  the  apostolic  dogmas  !  to  the 
declarations  of  the  Holy  Councils!  and  to  all  the 
accepted  Fathers !  and  that  they  followed  the  false 
teachings  of  the  heretics.  They  further  pro- 
nounced that  the  names  of  those  whose  doctrines 
they  execrated  must  also  be  thrust  forth  from  the 
Holy  Church  of  God.     Then  follow  the  names  of 


394     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Serglus,  Cyrus  of  Alexandria,  Pyrrhus,  Paul,  and 
Peter  of  Constantinople  and  Theodore  of  Pharan, 
who  had  all  been  rejected  by  Pope  Agatho  because 
they  were  opposed  to  the  orthodox  faith  and  upon 
whom  they  pronounced  anathema.  The  document 
then  continues,  and  with  these  we  define  that  these 
shall  be  expelled  from  the  holy  Chuj^ch  of  God,  and 
anathematised  Honorius,  who  was  sometime  Pope  of 
Old  Rome,  because  of  ivhat  we  fonnd  written  by  him 
to  Sergius,  that  in  all  respects  he  folloived  his  view 
and  confimned  his  impious  doctrines,  etc.  etc.^ 

This  was  followed  by  the  acclamations  of  the 
Fathers,  in  which,  after  greeting  the  Emperor  in 
fulsome  phrases,  together  with  Agatho  the  Pope, 
George,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  Theo- 
phanes  of  Antioch,  the  Council,  and  the  Senate, 
they  pronounced  anathema  against  Theodore  of 
Pharan  the  heretic,  Sergius  the  heretic,  Cyrus  the 
heretic,  Honorius  the  heretic,  etc.  etc."-^ 

Then  followed  the  definition  of  the  Faith,  which 
was  made  at  the  eighteenth  session,  in  the  midst 
of  which  occurs  a  denunciation  of  the  personages 
previously  declared  to  be  heretics,  and,  inter  alia, 
the  Fathers  declare  "how  the  author  of  evil,  who 
in  the  bes^innine  availed  himself  of  the  aid  of  the 
serpent,  .  .  .  had  found  suitable  instruments  for 
working  out  his  will."  Then  comes  a  list  of  the 
leaders  of  the  Monothelites  who  had  been  thus  mis- 
led by  the  Devil ;  in  which  we  read  :  "And  moreover 
Honorius,  who  was  Pope  of  the  Elder  Rome."^ 

^  Percival,  op.  cit.  342-43-  '  ib.  343,  ^  lb.  344. 


APPENDIX  II  395 

There  then  follows  the  so-called  Prosphoneticus, 
or  Report  of  the  Council  to  the  Emperor,  with  a 
recapitulation  of  the  Faith  and  a  denunciation  of 
various  heretics,  including  the  leaders  of  the  Mono- 
thelites.  "We  cast  out  of  the  Church,"  says  the 
document,  "and  rightly  subject  to  anathema  all 
superfluous  novelties  as  well  as  their  inventors,  that  is 
to  say,  Theodore  of  Pharan,  etc.  etc."  Then  follows 
the  sentence,  "And  with  them  Honorius,  who  was 
the  ruler  (irpoeSpov)  of  Rome,  since  he  followed  them 
in  these  thinos."  Then  follows  a  letter  from  the 
Council  addressed  to  Pope  Agatho,  telling  him 
how,  by  the  help  of  the  Emperor  Constantine, 
the  Fathers  there  had  overthrown  the  error  of 
impiety,  etc.  etc.,  and  had  slain  with  anathema  as 
lapsed  concerning  the  faith  and  as  sinners  certain 
persons  ...  in  accordance  with  the  sentence 
already  given  concerning  them  in  the  Pope's 
letter,  .  .  .  "their  names,"  they  add,  "are  these: 
Theodore,  Bishop  of  Pharan,  Sergius,  Honorius, 
Cyrus,  Paul,  Pyrrhus,  and  Peter,"  etc.  etc.^ 

Lastly,  followed  the  Imperial  decree  proclaim- 
ing the  finding  of  the  Council,  which  was  posted 
up  in  the  third  atrium  of  the  great  Church  near 
the  Dicymbala.  In  this  decree  the  Council  speaks 
of  "the  unholy  priests  who  infected  the  Church 
and  falsely  governed  it,"  and  mentions  the  Mono- 
thelite  leaders  by  name,  among  them  "  Honorius, 
the  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  the  confirmer  of  heresy 
who  contradicted    himself."     It  then   proceeds  to 

^  Percival,  op.  cit.  349. 


396     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

anathematise  the  originator  [i.e.  Sergius)  and 
"  these  patrons  "  of  the  new  heresy.  Among  them 
"  Honorius,  who  was  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  who  in 
everything  agreed  with  them,  went  with  them  and 
strengthened   the  heresy"  :    top  Kara  nrcivra  tovtol^ 

avvaLpeirjv  koX  crvvhpofxov  Kol  ^e^aicorrjv  ri]<i  alpeaeoi^} 

These  extracts  are  conclusive,  and  no  amount  of 
casuistry  or  chicanery  can  undo  their  effect.  The 
only  way  of  destroying  it  would  be,  in  fact,  to  declare 
them  forgeries.  This  course  was  actually  adopted 
by  some  of  the  most  famous  Roman  controversialists 
of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  who 
were  once  deemed  almost  invincible,  and  who 
are  now  seldom  quoted  by  any  serious  student, 
since  their  pitiful  and  disingenuous  controversial 
quibbles,  mistakes,  and  deliberate  perversions  of 
the  truth,  in  the  supposed  cause  of  the  Church,  have 
made  their  names  a  byword.  As  Friedrichs 
(himself,  a  great  scholar),  with  very  different  views 
of  historical  verity,  says  :  "  This  one  fact — that  a 
great  Council,  universally  received  afterwards  with- 
out hesitation  throughout  the  Church,  and  presided 
over  by  Papal  legates,  pronounced  the  dogmatic 
decision  of  a  Pope  heretical,  and  anathematised 
him  by  name  as  a  heretic — is  a  proof  clear  as  the 
sun  at  noonday  that  the  notion  of  any  peculiar 
enlightenment  or  inerrancy  of  the  Popes  was  then 
utterly  unknown  to  the  whole  Church.  The  only 
resource  of  the  defenders  of  Papal  Infallibility 
since    Torquemada    and     Bellarmine "    (including, 

1  Pcrcival,  op.  cit.  352,  353 


APPENDIX  II  397 

may  I  add,  Baronius),  **  has  been  to  attack  the  Acts 
of  the  Council  as  spurious,  and  to  maintain  that 
they  are  a  wholesale  forgery  of  the  Greeks.  The 
Jesuits  clung  tenaciously  to  this  notion  till  the 
middle  of  the  last  century  (i.e.  the  eighteenth 
century).     Since,  it  has  had  to  be  abandoned."^ 

The  immediate  successor  of  Pope  Agatho  was 
Leo  the  Second,  who  is  described  in  the  Liber 
Pontijicalis,  as  Vir  eloquentissiimis  in  divinis 
scripturis  snfficienter  instrttctus,  Graeca  Latinaqtie 
lingua  ei^udihts,  etc.  etc.^ 

"  He  being  Pope  at  the  time  received  the  decree 
[s2iscepit  sanctavi)  of  the  Sixth  Council,  above 
cited,  which  he  most  carefully  translated  into 
Latin  (quain  et  studiosissinie  in  Latino  ij^anslatavit), 
and    in    which   were    condemned    Cyrus,    Sergius, 

^  Janus,  pp.  74,  75.  I  may  here  quote  a  passage  from  the  same 
work,  which  puts  the  similar  case  of  Pope  VigiHus  and  the  Three 
Chapters  in  a  particularly  vivid  way,  and  which  I  overlooked  when 
discussing  the  question  in  my  previous  volume  on  Pope  Gregory. 
Speaking  of  the  attitude  of  that  Pope  towards  the  writings  of  Theodore, 
Theodoret,  and  Ibas,  which  were  held  to  be  Nestorian,  the  author 
says  :  "  He  first  pronounced  them  orthodox  in  546,  then  condemned 
them  the  next  year,  and  then  again  reversed  this  sentence  in  deference 
to  the  western  bishops,  and  then  came  into  conflict  with  the  Fifth 
General  Council,  which  excommunicated  him.  Finally,  he  submitted 
to  the  judgment  of  the  Council,  declaring  that  he  had  unfortunately 
been  a  tool  in  the  hands  of  Satan,"  who  labours  for  the  destruction  of 
the  Church,  and  had  thus  been  divided  from  his  colleagues  ;  but  God 
had  now  enlightened  him  (see  his  letter  to  the  Patriarch  Eutychius  ;  cf. 
De  Marca,  Dissert.,  Paris,  1669,  p.  45).  Thus  he  thrice  contradicted 
himself:  first  he  anathematised  those  who  condemned  the  Three 
Chapters  as  erroneous  ;  then  he  anathematised  those  who  held  them 
to  be  orthodox,  as  he  had  himself  just  held  them  to  be  ;  soon  after  he 
condemned  the  condemnation  of  the  Three  Chapters  ;  and,  lastly,  the 
Emperor  and  Council  triumphed  again  over  the  fickle  Pope  (Janus, 

pp.  72,  73)- 

^  L.  P.,  ad.  nom.  Leo  II. 


398     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Honorius,  Pyrrhus,  Paulus,  Petrus,"  etc.  etc.  If  the 
name  of  Honorius  was  not  present  in  the  decree 
of  the  Council  sent  to  Rome  and  translated  by  the 
Pope,  how  comes  it  to  be  in  the  Liber  Pontijicalis  ? 

This  is  by  no  means  all.  Leo  confirmed  the 
decrees  of  the  Council  and  expressly  anathematised 
Honorius.  His  words  are:  '^  Anathe7natizainus 
.  .  .  necnon  et  Honorius,  qui  hanc  apostolicam 
Ecclesimn  non  apostolicae  traditionis  doctrina  lus- 
travit,  sed  pro/ana  proditione  imniaculatavi  fidem 
subvertere  conatus  est,  et  omnes,  qtii  in  suo  erro7^e 
defuncti  stmt."'^  If  the  name  of  Honorius  was 
inserted  in  the  Acts  of  the  Council  by  a  fraud, 
how  came  Leo  the  Second,  who  not  only  was 
represented  at  the  same  Council  by  several  of  his 
own  deputies,  and  himself  received  and  translated 
its  Acts,  to  join  in  anathematising  him  ? 

Leo  went  even  further.  As  Milman  says : 
"The  impeccability  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was 
not  as  yet  an  article  of  the  Roman  creed."  He 
hastened  to  advertise  the  heresy  of  Honorius. 
To  the  Bishops  of  Spain  he  wrote  of  him,  ''qui 
flani77iain  haeixtici  dogmatis  non,  ut  decuit  aposto- 
licam authoritateni  incipienteni  extinxit  sed  negli- 
gendo  confovity^ 

To  the  King  of  Spain  he  wrote  :  'V/  tma  cum 
eis  Honorius  Romanus  qui  immaculatam  apostolicae 
traditionis  regulam  quam  a  praedecessoribus  suis 
accepit  inaculari  consensit''^ 

^  See  Percival,  op.  cit.  352.  ^  Labbe,  p.  1146. 

3  lb.  1252. 


APPENDIX  II  399 

Not  only  so,  but  in  692,  only  twelve  years  after 
the  meeting  of  the  Sixth  Council,  another  Council 
was  held  at  Trullo,  commonly  called  the  Ouinisext 
Council.  In  the  first  Canon  of  this  Council  there 
is  a  confirmation  of  the  finding  of  the  Sixth 
Council  on  the  question  of  the  Monothelites,  in 
which  it  describes  the  sentence  on  them  and  their 
views  as  just,  and  this  for  their  having  adulterated 
the  true  doctrine.  Here  again  "  Honorius  of 
Rome  "  is  named  among  those  anathematised. 

Well  may  Mr.  Percival,  a  singularly  fair 
historian,  who  is  generally  found  leaning  to  the  side 
of  Orthodoxy,  say  :  "  With  such  an  array  of  proof  no 
conservative  historian,  it  would  seem,  can  question 
the  fact  that  Honorius,  the  Pope  of  Rome,  was 
condemned  and  anathematised  as  a  heretic  by  the 
6th  QEcumenical  Council.  "  ^  Again  he  says  :  "  The 
groundlessness,  not  to  say  absurdity,  of  Baronius's 
view  has  been  often  exposed  by  those  of  his 
own  communion  ;  a  brief  but  sufficient  summary  of 
the  refutation  will  be  found  in  Hefele  who,  while 
taking  a  very  halting  and  unsatisfactory  position 
himself,  yet  is  perfectly  clear  that  Baronius's  con- 
tention is  utterly  indefensible."  ^ 

Even  if  Baronius  had  been  right  as  to  the 
Council,  he  still  had  to  account  for  Leo  the  2nd 
(also  an  infallible  Pope)  having  on  a  most  solemn 
occasion  joined  in  anathematising  his  predecessor  as 
a  heretic.      Not  only  so.     We  can  go  still  further. 

^  Percival,  ib.  352. 

2  Hefele,  Hist,  of  the  Councils.,  v.  p.  190,  et  seq. 


400     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

In  the  Liber  Dittrnus,  which  contains  drafts  of 
different  ecclesiastical  documents  to  be  used  on 
various  occasions,  there  is  a  form  of  the  Papal  Oath 
taken  by  every  Pope  down  to  the  eleventh  century 
in  the  shape  probably  prescribed  by  Gregory  the 
2nd.  This  oath  smites  with  eternal  anathema 
the  originators  of  the  New  heresy,  Sergius,  etc., 
''together  ivith  Honorms,  because  he  assisted  the 
base  statements  of  the  heretics T  ^ 

Lastly,  in  the  lesson  for  the  feast  of  St. 
Leo  the  2nd  in  the  Roman  Breviary,  the  name 
of  Pope  Honorius  used  to  occur  among  those 
excommunicated  by  the  Sixth  Synod.  It  has  since 
been  erased.  On  this  erasure  Bossuet  (perhaps 
the  greatest  of  French  Catholic  Bishops),  remarks  : 
"  They  suppress  as  far  as  they  can,  the  Liber 
Diurnus :  they  have  erased  this  from  the  Roman 
Breviary.  Have  they  therefore  hidden  it  ?  Truth 
breaks  out  from  all  sides,  and  these  things  become 
so  much  the  more  evident  as  they  are  the  more 
studiously  put  out  of  sight."  ^ 

The  question  that  has  to  be  faced,  then,  and 
which  was  never  faced  by  the  Vatican  Council,  is 
not  so  much  the  condemnation  and  anathematisation 
of  a  Pope,  viz.  Honorius,  as  a  heretic,  by  a  Council, 
but  by  the  voice  of  the  whole  Church,  Greek,  and 
Latin,  until  the  Jesuits  and  their  scholars  invented 
the  theory  of  Papal  Infallibility  in  the  i6th 
century,  and  afterwards  forced  it  as  a  Dogma  on 

^  Una  cuin  Honorto,  qui  fraudis  eorunt  assertionibus  fotnentum 
impendit,  op  cit.  ed.  Sickel,  p.  loo. 

*  Bossuet,  Def.  Cler.  Gal.,  vii.  ch.  26. 


APPENDIX  II  401 

the  Vatican  Council.  Proving  thereby  once  more 
how  much  they  despise  all  history  which  has  not 
passed  through  their  sophisticating  crucibles. 

This  action  of  the  whole  Church,  and  especially 
of  the  whole  Latin  Church  in  the  matter,  completely 
sweeps  away  the  contentions  of  other  apologists 
who  accept  the  Acts  of  the  6th  Council  as  genuine 
and  as  not  interpolated,  but  question  their  validity 
on  various  grounds.  Ex.  g7\  Pennachi,  the  most 
rational  of  all  the  Roman  apologists,  in  his  de 
Honor h  I.  Romani  Pontificalis,  causa  in  Concilia  vi., 
argues  quite  arbitrarily  and  without  a  shadow 
of  proof  and  even  of  probability,  that  the  6th 
Council  ceased  to  be  oecumenical  and  had  become 
only  a  synod  of  a  number  of  Orientals  before  it 
took  action  against  the  Monothelites.  I  need 
hardly  say  that  no  one  has  been  found  to  follow 
Pennachi's  lead  in  this  fantastic  contention. 

Those  who  try  by  comparing  phrases,  and 
especially  confronting  the  two  letters  of  Honorius, 
to  soften  the  effect  of  a  strong,  clear  pronounce- 
ment in  one  letter  by  a  rather  softer  phrase  in 
the  other,  and  hence  console  themselves  with  the 
notion  that  the  Pope  did  not  mean  what  he  actually 
said,  forget  what  their  attitude  means.  It  means 
that  in  this  matter  a  certain  number  of  individuals, 
Jesuits  or  secular  priests,  driven  from  every  other 
refuge,  have  at  last  found  shelter  in  setting  up 
their  own  obiter  dicta,  their  own  arguments,  and 
their  own  conclusions  against  the  positive  decision 

of  a  Council  and  of  a  Pope,  who  had  before  them 
26 


402     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

all  the  evidence  now  available  and  perhaps  still 
more,  and  yet  joined  in  unanimously  pronouncing 
the  teaching  of  the  letters  to  be  heretical  and  worthy 
of  anathema.  This  is  an  appeal  to  Private  Judg- 
ment with  a  vengeance,  and  is  a  crutch  which  we 
should  have  thought  the  Society  of  Jesus  would  be 
the  very  last  to  employ.  To  question  the  fallibility 
or  the  heresy  of  a  Pope,  which  have  been  affirmed 
by  a  Council  and  supported  by  later  Popes,  ought 
surely  to  be  itself  heresy,  if  there  is  any  sense  or 
meaning  in  the  decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council. 

The  last  refuge  of  those  who  have  upheld  a 
hopeless  fight  [has  been  to  declare  that  the  pro- 
nouncements of  Honorius  were  only  his  private 
opinions  and  were  not  delivered  ex  cathedra.  If  this 
was  so,  what  possible  pronouncement  can  be  deemed 
ex  cathed7'a  ?  When  has  a  pronouncement  been 
made  on  a  more  solemn  occasion  than  when  made 
on  the  invitation  of  the  great  Patriarch  of  the 
East  with  the  purpose  of  agreeing  on  a  formula, 
a  modus  vivendi,  with  the  most  numerous  and 
formidable  of  then  existing  heretics.  The  more 
influential,  recent  controversialists  on  the  Roman 
side  have  seen  this,  and  have  seen  how  the  con- 
tention in  question  practically  cancels  the  finding 
of  the  Vatican  Council.  Thus  Pennachi  says 
distinctly  that  the  letters  of  Honorius  were,  strictly 
speaking,  Papal  decrees,  set  forth  auctoritate  aposto- 
lica,  and  therefore  irreformable.^ 

In   this  behalf  it   is  instructive  to  turn  to  the 

^  Percival,  op.  cit.  351. 


APPENDIX  II  403 

statements  of  the  Jesuit  Grisar.  Grisar  admits 
completely  the  genuineness  of  the  Pope's  first  letter  to 
Sergius.  He  then  proceeds  to  discuss  that  part  of  it 
dealing  with  two  natures.  He  admits  definitely  that 
the  Pope,  in  regard  to  it,  was  speaking  ex  cathedra, 
because  he  fulfilled  the  conditions  demanded  by 
the  Vatican  Council  for  an  ex  cathedra  pronounce- 
ment. The  pronouncement  in  question  made  by  that 
Council  was  qtmvi  omnium  Christianorum  pastoris 
et  doctoris  m,unere  fungere pro  stcprenia  sua  apostolica 
auctoritate  doctrinam  de  fide  vel  moribus  ab  zcniversa 
ecclesia  tenendiun  defi^tit}  Grisar  thus  applies  this 
decision  to  the  letter  of  Honorius.  {^In  quando  alle 
due  7iat2Lrey  per  una  definizione  ex  cathedra,  perche 
pone  la  condizione  ex  cathedral")  He  limits  his 
argument,  however,  to  that  part  of  the  Pope's  letter 
dealing  with  "the  operative  part  of  the  Will," 
about  which  there  is  no  contention. 

He  does  not  apparently  refer  directly  to  the 
Pope's  decision  in  regard  to  the  single  will  which 
was  made  in  the  same  letter  and  in  the  same  clear 
way,  and  of  which  I  have  quoted  the  ipsissima 
verba,  but  his  argument  implies  that  if  one  part 
was  ex  cathedra,  so  also  must  the  other  have  been. 
They  are  both  contained  in  the  same  document, 
and  no  distinction  is  made  between  their  potency 
by  the  Pope.  There  is  no  escape  from  this  position. 
We  are  driven  then  to  the  conclusion  that  Pope 
Honorius,  when  issuing  a  pronouncement  on  the 
Faith,  in  which  he  defined  what  was  then  a  new 

^  Sess.  iv.  Chap.  4.  -  Analecta,  vol.  i.  398,  399. 


404     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

dogma,  was  speaking  ex  cathedra,  and  in  liis 
character  as  the  mouthpiece  of  the  Church.  If 
what  he  said  was  heretical,  then  it  follows  that  an 
Infallible  Pope  can  be  guilty  of  heresy.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  as  Pennachi  argues,  the  Pope's  letters 
were  orthodox  and  the  Council  was  in  error  in 
condemning  him,  then  an  CEcumenical  Council  and 
a  whole  catena  of  infallible  Popes  have  been  heretical 
themselves  in  pronouncing  Honorius'  view  heretical. 
Lastly,  whether  heretical  or  not  heretical,  the  mere 
condemnation  under  anathema  of  an  Infallible  Pope, 
speaking  ex  cathedra  by  either  a  Council  or  by 
other  Infallible  Popes,  is  a  reductio  ad  absurdtim 
of  Papal  Infallibility. 

There  still  remains  another  matter,  however. 
If  the  contention  of  Pennachi  and  Grisar  be  right, 
that  Pope  Honorius  was  speaking  ex  cathedra  when 
definine  Monothelism  as  the  true  orthodox  faith, 
and  that  in  doing  so  he  pronounced  an  irreversible 
decision  on  the  subject,  then  a  very  important 
Council  and  a  great  many  Popes  have  themselves 
been  tainted  with  serious  heresy  in  declaring 
Honorius  a  heretic,  and  in  adopting  as  "  the 
Faith  "  what  he  denounced  as  heresy.  It  is  for  the 
champions  of  Infallibility  to  unfasten  this  Gordian 
knot.  To  a  Protestant  it  would  seem  plain  that, 
whether  the  Pope  was  heretical  or  not,  his  decision 
in  the  matter  was  the  only  one  consistent  with 
sound  sense  and  which  did  not  involve  a  con- 
tradiction or  absurdity.  It  is  strange,  indeed,  under 
these  circumstances  to  find   Father  Mann  closing 


APPENDIX  II  405 

his  account  of  Pope  Honorius  with  this  phrase, 
"  With  whatever  degree  of  guilt  he  incurred  from 
his  action  with  regard  to  his  letter  to  Sergius, 
Honorius  went  to  meet  his  Maker  on  October  6t,8." 
I  am  afraid  the  Infallible  Pope  will  fare  very  badly 
if  he  has  to  depend  on  the  prayers  of  Father 
Mann. 


APPENDIX    III 

The  Popes  and  their  Nuncios  at 
Constantinople 

The  connection  and  intercourse  between  the  Popes 
and   the    Civil    Rulers    of    Italy   in    the   sixth   and 
seventh   centuries,   which  had    a    potent    effect   on 
European  history,  has  still  to  be  adequately  eluci- 
dated.    During  a  considerable  part  of  this  period 
Italy    was    dominated    by    the    Goths,    who    were 
Arians  and  who  had  a  Church  and  bishops  of  their 
own,  and  the  position  of  the  Popes  was  a  difficult 
and  unenviable  one.     While  they  were  not  much 
interfered  with  in  their  administrative  work,  so  long 
as  they  did  not  themselves  interfere  with  politics,  the 
Gothic  kings  meddled  considerably  in  the  selection 
of  the    new    Popes    and   largely   dominated    their 
election.     Simony  prevailed  to  a  scandalous  extent, 
as  did   intrigues  of  a   discreditable  kind,  and   the 
quality  and  endowments  of  the  candidates  became 
of  secondary  importance  in  their  chances  of  being 
elected,  compared  with  their  skill  in  corrupting  the 
officials  of  the  foreign  kings  and  in  their  powers  of 
chicane.     The  consequence  was  a  great  deteriora- 
tion in  their  quality.     Some  notes  on  this  question 

406 


APPENDIX  III  407 

will  certainly  not  be  impertinent  to  our  subject  ; 
my  remarks  can  only  be  limited. 

I  will  begin  with  the  death  of  Felix  the  4th 
in  October  530.  This  was  followed  by  the 
election  of  two  Popes.  Boniface  the  2nd,  who 
was  of  Gothic  parentage  and  who  when  elected 
was  duly  consecrated  in  the  Basilica  of  Julius  ( Jaffe, 
Regesta).  At  the  same  time  a  rival  party  elected 
and  consecrated  a  rival  Pope  named  Dioscorus, 
who  was  probably  a  Greek,  in  the  Basilica  of 
Constantine.  Dioscorus  died  a  few  weeks  later, 
and  thereupon  Boniface  anathematised  his  dead 
rival  for  simony.^  He  further  compelled  all  his 
clergy  to  subscribe  the  decree  containing  the 
anathemas. 

Boniface  then  summoned  a  synod  at  St.  Peter's 
and  caused  a  resolution  to  be  passed  [fecit  con- 
stihittmi),  which  was  written  down  and  signed  by 
the  clergy,  by  which,  contrary  to  the  Canons,  he 
secured  the  nomination  of  his  own  successor,  and 
proceeded  to  nominate  the  deacon  Vigilius. 
(Vigilius  is  also  styled  Archdeacon  in  the  Lib. 
Pont.,  sub  voce,  Silverius).  Grisar  names  him 
among  the  apocrisiarii}  A  subsequent  synod 
annulled  this  resolution  and  appointment  as 
uncanonical.  Boniface  acknowledged  his  error 
and  publicly  burnt  his  own  decree.^  He  died  in 
October  532. 

He  was  succeeded   by  John  the  2nd.      "The 

^  Cassiodorus,  Var.  9,  ep.  5.  '  Op.  cit.  par.  542. 

^  Liber  Pont.,  sub  voce,  Bon.  II. 


408     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

canvassings  and  contests,"  says  Dr.  Barmby,  "usual 
at  this  period  on  the  vacancy  of  the  See  .  .  . 
were  such  on  this  occasion  as  to  delay  the  election 
for  eleven  weeks.  Church  funds  had  been  ex- 
pended on  bribery,  and  even  sacred  vessels  had 
been  publicly  sold  for  the  purpose."  ^  John  died 
on  27th  May  535  a.d. 

He  was  succeeded  by  Agapetus,  the  son  of 
Gordian  a  priest,  who  was  then  an  old  man.  He 
began  by  reversing  the  decree  of  Boniface  about 
Dioscorus,  which  he  caused  to  be  burnt  in  the 
midst  of  the  assembled  congregation.^  He  was  a 
protege  of  the  Gothic  King  Theodahatus,  and  was 
employed  by  him  as  an  envoy  to  Constantinople, 
to  try  and  appease  Justinian.  While  there  he 
persuaded  the  latter  to  depose  the  Patriarch 
Anthemius,  suspected  of  being  a  Monophysite  and 
who  was  supported  by  the  Empress  Theodosia. 

The  visit  of  Agapetus  to  Constantinople  and 
his  long  residence  there,  no  doubt  had  a  consider- 
able effect  on  the  ties  of  the  Pope  with  the  Empire, 
which  were  thenceforth  much  closer,  and  we  are 
expressly  told  that  on  leaving  the  capital  in  536 
he  left  behind  him  Pelagius,  who  subsequently 
became  Pope,  as  his  Nuncio,  or,  as  he  was 
otherwise  called  in  Greek,  his  apocrisiarius  (in  Latin, 
responsalis),  and  this  was  apparently  the  beginning 
of  the  appointment  of  a  regular  agent  by  the  Popes 
at  the  Imperial  Court.^ 

^  Diet.  Chr.  Biog.  iii.  390.  ^  jr/^  Pont..,  sub  voce.,  Agap. 

^  Grisar  suggests  that  the  appointment  of  such  an  agent  was  first 
made   by  Pope    Leo   the   Great   when,  in   the  middle   of  the   fifth 


APPENDIX  III  409 

Meanwhile,  in  the  absence  of  Agapetus,  BeHsarius 
captured  Rome,  which  had  long  been  in  the  hands  of 
the  Goths.     Agapetus  died  on  the  21st  of  April  536. 

Thereupon  a  subdeacon  called  Silverius,  a  son 
of  Pope  Hormisdas,  was  elected  in  his  place.  The 
election  of  Silverius,  says  Dr.  Barmby,  was  not  a 
free  one  on  the  part  of  the  Roman  Church,  but 
forced  upon  it  by  the  Gothic  King  Theodahatus, 
who  at  that  time  had  possession  of  the  city,  and  this 
not  without  simony  on  the  part  of  Silverius.  The 
Lib.  Pont,  says  distinctly  :  "  Hie  levahis  est  a  tyranno 
Theodato  sine  deliberatione  decreti.  Qui  Theodatiis, 
c  or  rtipttts  pecuniae  dattnn,  talent  tinioremindixit  clero, 
ttt  qui  non  consentiret  in  hujus  ordinationein,  gladio 
puniretur.  Quod  qttidem  sace^^dotes  non  susscrip- 
sertmt  in  euni  seacndttm  7noi'em  anticum,  vel  decretjun 
confirniaverttnt  ante  ordinationem."  The  author  of 
that  work  goes  on  to  say  that  after  his  ordination, 
thus  effected  by  force  and  intimidation  (Grisar 
might  have  added  by  simony  also),  "  the  presbyters 
assented  to  it  for  the  sake  of  the  Church." 

Presently,  BeHsarius,  on  the  loth  of  December 
536,  entered  Rome  again  in  the  name  of  Justinian, 
while  Theodahatus  was  assassinated  and  succeeded 
by  his  general  Vitiges. 

Meanwhile  Vigilius,  whom  we  have  already 
mentioned,  was  sent  for  by  the  Empress  Theodora. 
She  promised  to  secure  the  See  of  Rome  for  him 

century,  he  sent  Julianus,  Bishop  of  Cos,  as  his  agent  to  report  to  him 
what  was  done  at  Constantinople.  This  appointment,  however,  was 
apparently  an  individual  act  of  his.  (Grisar,  It.  tr.,  ed.  ii.  vol.  i,  pars. 
237  and  542.) 


4IO     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

through  Belisarius  if  he  would  adhere  to  Monothel- 
ism.  Belisarius,  it  was  further  said,  had  also  been 
bribed  by  Vigilius.  Silverius  was  now  accused  of 
a  traitorous  correspondence  with  the  new  Gothic 
King  Vitiges.  He  was  disrobed,  his  pall  was  re- 
moved, and  he  was  dressed  as  a  monk  and  banished 
to  Pontus,  and  Vigilius  was  forthwith  elected  and 
ordained  in  his  stead  by  order  of  Belisarius. 

Presently  Silverius  died  of  famine  (deficiens 
inortuus  est).  This  was  on  the  20th  of  June 
538  A.D.,  a  year  after  his  deposition.  It  is 
perfectly  clear  that  he  had  not  been  canonically 
deposed,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he 
remained  the  lawful  Pope  until  his  death.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  appointment  of  Vigilius  was 
entirely  illegal  and  invalid,  inasmuch  as  there  is  no 
evidence  of  his  having  been  re-elected,  so  that  it 
would  seem  his  Papacy  was  entirely  irregular  and 
void,  as  were  the  acts  of  his  reign,  and  that  he  ought 
to  be  treated  as  an  Anti-Pope.  "  Never,"  says  Dr. 
Barmby,  "  was  there  a  time  in  which  the  dignity  of 
the  great  Roman  See  suffered  so  much  as  this ;  a 
time  when  such  things  as  have  been  related  could 
be  done  through  the  machinations  of  two  women 
such  as  Theodora  and  Antonina.  Imperial 
domination  from  Constantinople  proved  in  fact  no 
good  exchange  for  the  more  immediate  authority  of 
the  Gothic  kings  of  Italy,  who  though  themselves 
Arians  had  generally  treated  the  Catholic  Church 
with  respect  and  fairness."  ^ 

1  D.C.B.  iv.  673. 


APPENDIX  III  411 

On  the  death  of  Silverius,  Vigilius  sent  secret 
letters  to  Anthemius,  Theodosius,  and  Severus,  in 
which  he  adhered  to  the  Monophysite  cause,  and 
added  a  confession  of  his  faith  in  which  he  con- 
demned the  Tome  of  Pope  Leo,  while  the 
orthodox  doctrine  of  two  natures  in  Christ  was 
enunciated.  In  another  letter  he  maligned  Paul 
of  Samosata,  Diodorus  of  Tarsus,  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia,  and  Theodoret.  Pagi  has  completely 
proved  this,  although  he  holds  that  the  See  of 
Rome  had  not  been  compromised,  since  Vigilius 
was  not  the  true  Pope  at  the  time  of  writing. 
When  he  became  so,  Pagi  does  not  show. 

I  do  not  propose  to  continue  much  further  the 
story  of  this  Anti-Pope,  who,  as  I  showed  in  the 
previous  Appendix,  was  continually  reversing  what 
he  had  previously  affirmed,  compromising  the  Holy 
See,  and  raising  insuperable  difficulties  for  those 
champions  of  infallibility  who  still  claim  him  as  a 
real  Pope.  Two  things,  however,  seem  plain. 
When  Vigilius  was  a  free  man  and  not  under 
durance  we  find  him  affirming  in  his  famous 
Constit7ituiu,  which  was  signed  by  seventeen  other 
Latin  Bishops  and  by  other  clerics,  including 
Pelagius,  who  became  his  successor,  "that  it  was 
not  lawful  to  subvert  anything  constituted  by  the 
Holy  Council  of  Chalcedon."^  This  represents 
undoubtedly  the  Catholic  faith  and  practice  in 
early  times  in  regard  to  Conciliar  decisions.  Those 
who  came  after,  and  notably  St.  Gregory,  who  per- 

^  ConciL  ix.  103. 


412     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

mitted  the  Church  to  be  dragooned  into  assenting 
to  the  reversal  of  a  Conciliar  decision  at  the  beck 
of  a  lay  emperor  and  then  supplied  sophistical 
arguments  to  support  their  conduct,  were  sorry 
advocates  of  Truth.  Secondly,  we  must  re- 
member what  Vigilius,  then  a  Pope  and  admitted 
into  the  lists  as  a  legitimate  Pope  by  the  champions 
of  orthodoxy,  declared  when  free  from  durance,  and 
writing  as  he  thought  with  the  support  of  and  the 
signatures  of  seventeen  bishops  including  that  of 
his  successor  as  Pope.  He  then  said  that  he  had 
always  been  of  one  opinion  and  had  only  apparently 
differed  in  consequence  of  the  machinations  of  the 
devil,  who  had  deceived  him.  His  desire  had 
always  been  to  ascertain  the  Truth,  and  he  need 
not  be  ashamed  of  acknowledging  former  errors, 
since  so  distinguished  a  theologian  and  Latin 
scholar  as  St.  Augustine  had  corrected  his  own 
writings  and  retracted  his  own  words.  This  is  a 
brave  confession,  but  it  is  fatal  to  the  claim  of 
infallibility  in  the  case  of  one  Pope  at  all  events.  He 
then  proceeded  to  anathematise  the  opinions  he  had 
held  when  under  constraint — that  is,  the  opinions 
which  Pelagius  the  2nd,  and  Gregory,  and  other 
Popes  fought  for,  and  to  declare  them  null  and 
void.  There  is  no  answer  to  this  indictment,  for 
the  attempt  to  make  out  the  Constihttimi  to  have 
been  a  forgery  has  utterly  failed.  Vigilius  died 
either  late  in  554  or  early  in  555. 

He    was  succeeded    by  Pelagius  the    ist,  who 
had  been  appointed  by  Pope  Agapetus  when  about 


APPENDIX  III  413 

to  leave  Constantinople  in  536  a.d.  as  his  apocri- 
siarius  there,  this  being  apparently  the  first  occasion 
on  which  the  office  was  definitely  created. 

He  was  a  man  of  very  considerable  abilities. 
These  he  had  used  during  his  long  residence  as 
Nuncio  at  Constantinople,  with  dexterity  and  ad- 
dress, in  his  diplomatic  struggles  with  the  heads  of 
the  Greek  Church  and  with  slight  scruples.  He  was 
very  subservient  to  the  Empress  Theodora,  and 
acted  in  her  interest  on  several  occasions,  while  he 
attached  himself  to  the  fortunes  of  her  protege.  Pope 
Vigilius,  whose  wavering  attitude  on  the  question  of 
"  the  Three  Chapters  "  he  followed  with  considerable 
agility  and  without  compromising  himself  too  much. 

Justinian,  having  recovered  Italy  for  the  Empire, 
issued  his  famous  Pragmatic  Sanction,  by  which  the 
administration  of  the  country  was  revised  and  many 
much-needed  reforms  and  remedies  were  introduced. 
Among  other  things,  he  was  determined  to  have  a 
dominant  influence  in  the  selection  and  approval  of 
the  Pope  and  the  control  of  his  policy.  The  Pope 
was  too  powerful  a  person  (now  that  the  Arian  rulers 
had  been  displaced),  to  be  allowed  a  free  hand  at 
Rome,  and  from  this  time  the  confirmation  of  his 
election  by  the  Emperor  was  exacted  as  a  condition 
of  his  legality. 

Mr.  Holmes  describes  graphically  what  followed 
on  the  death  of  Vigilius.  He  says  :  "  The  Emperor 
judged  sagaciously  that  the  vacant  Popedom  was 
an  allurement  which  would  dissipate  the  most 
assured  theological  convictions  ;  and  he  determined 


414     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

to  test  its  potency  on  the  man  who  above  all 
others  was  best  fitted  for  the  Papal  seat.  When 
an  intimation  was  conveyed  to  the  redoubtable 
champion  of  Chalcedon,  Pelagius,  that  the  ponti- 
ficate was  the  prize  of  his  recantation,  the  weapons 
with  which  he  had  so  long  defended  '  the  Three 
Chapters '  escaped  from  his  nerveless  grasp,  and 
while  he  accepted  the  tiara  of  the  West  with  one 
hand,  he  signed,  with  the  other,  a  convention  that 
his  faith  was  assimilated  in  all  respects  to  that  of 
the  princely  donor.  The  report  of  his  defection 
preceded  him  to  Rome,  and  on  his  arrival  there 
the  influence  of  Narses  scarcely  availed  to  induce 
the  ecclesiastics  of  sufficient  rank  to  perform  the 
ceremony  of  his  consecration.  He  had  coven- 
anted with  Justinian  to  enforce  the  decrees  of  the 
Fifth  General  Council  in  the  West,  with  the 
authority  which  attached  to  the  occupant  of  St. 
Peter's  chair  ;  but  the  hostility  of  the  Roman 
Bishops  was  so  positive  that  he  was  obliged  to 
shelter  himself  behind  ambiguous  utterances  and 
pronouncements  as  to  his  unfaltering  allegiance  to 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon."^  Erastianism  in  the 
very  highest  quarters  in  the  Church  could  hardly 
2:0  further  than  this. 

"The  appointment,"  says  Dr.  Barmby,  "was 
not  welcome  to  the  Romans  themselves,  and  there 
was  even  a  difficulty  in  getting  prelates  to  conse- 
crate him.  Two  only  in  the  end  officiated,  John 
of  Perusia  and  Bonus  of  Ferentinum,  assisted  by 

^  The  Age  of  Justinian  and  Theodora,  ii.  686. 


APPENDIX  III  415 

Andrew,  a  presbyter  of  Ostia,  in  place  of  the  bishop 
of  that  See,  whose  pecuHar  privilege  it  generally 
was  to  ordain  the  Popes. ^  His  dubious  attitude 
on  the  subject  of  the  Three  Chapters  led  to 
Pelagius  being  accused  of  heresy  not  only  in  Italy 
but  in  Gaul,  where  King  Childebert  challenged  his 
orthodoxy.      He  died  in  the  year  560.^ 

"  On  his  death,"  in  the  words  of  Milman,  "  Rome 
waited  in  obsequious  submission  the  permission  of 
the  Emperor  to  inaugurate  her  new  Pope,  John 
the  3rd."  His  obscure  reign  lasted  for  over 
twelve  years,  when  he  was  succeeded  by  Benedict, 
the  early  patron  of  St.  Gregory,  whose  short  reign 
of  four  years  was  marked  by  the  invasion  and  the 
terrible  ravages  of  the  Lombards.  The  appalling 
condition  of  things  is  marked  by  a  notable 
sentence  in  the  Liber  Pontificalis,  where  we  read 
of  his  successor,  Pelagius  the  2nd,  who  occupied 
the  Papal  Chair  in  580,  Hie  ordinatur  absque 
mssione  principis,  eo  quod  Langubardi  obsederent 
civitateni  Ro7nanam,  which  shows  what  a  remark- 
able anomaly  such  an  election  was  thought  to  be. 

It  might  be  partly  to  excuse  this  informality,  as 
well  as  to  seek  help  against  the  Lombards,  that,  as 
Dr.  Barmby  says,  Pelagius  sent  a  deputation  to  the 
Emperor  Tiberius.  This  was  headed  by  Gregory, 
afterwards  Pope,  whom  Pelagius  had  appointed 
his  apocrisiariiis.  Pelagius,  like  the  other  Popes  of 
this    period,    suffered    from    having    to    defend    a 

1  Lib.  Pont.,  sub.  voce,  Pelagius  I. 
"^  Diet.  Chr,  Biog.  iv.  296. 


4i6     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

position  in  regard  to  the  Three  Chapters  which  had 
been  compromised  by  his  predecessor  VigiHus,  and 
it  was  fortunate  for  him  he  had  such  a  skilful 
advocate  as  Gregory,  who  returned  to  Rome,  as 
we  saw  in  a  previous  volume,  in  585,  and  became 
the  Pope's  Secretary  there. 

On  the  return  of  Gregory  to  Rome  his  place 
as  apocrisiariiis  was  apparently  taken  by  Laurence 
the  Archdeacon.  Pelagius  the  2nd  died  of  the 
plague  in  January  590. 

In  an  earlier  volume  we  have  seen  how  he 
was  succeeded  as  Pope  by  Gregory,  who  probably 
owed  that  position  to  the  favourable  impression 
he  had  created  at  Constantinople  during  his  long 
residence  there.  In  one  of  his  letters,  written 
in  September  591,  he  speaks  of  the  deposition  of 
Laurence,  who,  he  says,  had  been  a  Deacon  of 
the  Apostolic  See,  in  or  dine  diaconii  sedis 
apostolicae,  on  account  of  his  pride  and  evil  acts,  on 
which  the  Pope  preferred  to  keep  silence  (propter 
superbiain  et  mala  sua  quae  tacenda  duximus). 
Honoratus  was  elected  in  the  Golden  Basilica  (now 
called  the  Lateran),^  in  his  place,  in  the  presence  of 
all  the  priests,  deacons,  notaries,  subdeacons,  and 
clerks.  Honoratus  was  apparently  succeeded  by 
Sabinianus,  or  Savinianus,  whom  we  find  at 
Constantinople  acting  as  Nuncio  in  September 
594.  He  afterwards  became  Pope.^  We  must  say 
a  few  words  about  him,  as  his  earlier  career  has 
been  overlooked  by  the  historians  of  the  Popes. 

1  E.  and  H.  ii.  letter  i.  ^  Ante^  202. 


APPENDIX  III  417 

He  first  appears  in  a  letter  from  Gregory  to  John 
the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  written  in  July  593. 

In  this  letter,  after  discussing  several  matters,  he 
continues :  "  But  I  need  not  speak  at  length  by 
letter  about  these  things,  since  I  have  sent  my  most 
beloved  son,  the  deacon  Sabinianus,  as  my 
representative  in  ecclesiastical  matters  {p7-o 
responsis  Ecclesiasticis)  to  the  threshold  of  our 
Lords,  and  he  will  speak  to  you  more  particularly 
about  everything."^  In  a  letter  of  the  same  date 
sent  to  Priscus,  styled  the  Patrician  of  the  East, 
about  some  business,  he  bids  him  communicate 
with  Sabinianus  the  Deacon,  whom  he  there  calls 
bearer  of  presents  i^lator presentmni)}  In  another 
letter,  dated  August  593,  written  to  the  physician 
Theodorus  at  Constantinople,  he  commends  "his 
son  the  deacon  Sabinianus."^ 

In  September  and  October  594,  Gregory  writes 
to  Sabinianus  the  Deacon  at  Constantinople,  about 
Maximus  ("  praevaricator  "  at  Salona).* 

On  ist  June  595,  the  Pope  encloses  a  letter 
which  he  had  written  to  the  Patriarch  John  bidding 
him  deliver  it.  In  the  covering  note  he  freely 
discusses  the  latter's  pride  and  temper.^  In  this 
letter  written  to  the  Patriarch  he  reminds  him 
how  he  had  frequently  expostulated  by  previous 
responsales  (and  did  so  again  now  by  their  common 
son  Sabinianus),  on  his  assumption  of  the  title 
oecumenical.^     On  the  same  day  he  writes  to  the 

*  E.  andH.  iii.  52  ;  Barmby,  iii.  58.  ^  £  and  H.  iii.  51. 
2  lb.  iii.  64.                                                      1  lb.  V.  6. 

*  lb.  V.  45.  «  /^.  V.  44. 

Z1 


41 8     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

Empress  Constantina  to  tell  her  he  had  heard  of 
her  good  works  from  his  responsalis,  the  deacon 
Sabinianus. 

In  the  same  month  Gregory  writes  to  the 
Emperor  Maurice  about  various  matters,  and  inte7' 
alia  says  that  he  had  indicated  in  full  to  his 
responsalis  Sabinianus  what  had  happened  in  Rome, 
and  asking  Maurice  to  judge  the  matter  about 
which  he  was  writing  as  indicated  in  the  petition 
sent  through  the  latter.^  In  a  subsequent  letter 
written  directly  to  Sabinianus  also  in  regard  to  the 
pretensions  of  John  the  Faster,  he  tells  him  he 
is  not  to  communicate  (procedere)  with  him.  Dr. 
Barmby  says  the  word  procedere  was  especially 
used  for  approaching  the  altar  for  celebration. 
This  letter  was  written  in  July  595.^ 

In  July  596,  writing  to  Eulogius,  Bishop  of 
Alexandria,  he  says  that  some  time  before,  he  had 
sent  a  letter  to  Sabinianus  the  Deacon,  his  agent 
[responsa  ecclesiae)  in  the  Royal  City,  to  be  forwarded 
to  him  (Eulogius),  to  which  he  had  received  no 
reply. ^  This  letter  is  curious,  as  showing  that  it 
was  usual  to  communicate  with  Alexandria  by 
way  of  Constantinople. 

In  June  597,  Gregory  acknowledges  a  letter 
which  he  had  received  from  Anastasius,  Bishop 
of  Antioch,  through  their  "common  son"  the 
Deacon  Sabinianus.^ 

In  the  same  month  he  writes  to  Eulogius  and 

^  E.andH.v.y].  ''Ed.v.&,l, 

3  lb,  vi.  58.  *  lb.  vii.  24. 


APPENDIX  III  419 

Anastasius,  just  named,  and  concludes  the  letter 
with  the  words,  "  I  received  the  letters  of  Your 
Holiness  on  the  arrival  here  of  our  common  son 
the  Deacon  Sabinianus ;  but  as  their  bearer  is 
already  prepared  for  departure,  and  cannot  be 
detained,  I  will  reply  when  the  deacon,  my 
responsalis,  comes."  ^ 

In  June  597,  writing  to  "the  Patricia"  Theoctista 
and  to  Andrew,  he  acknowledges  the  receipt  of 
thirty  pounds  of  gold  which  they  had  sent  for  the 
redemption  of  slaves  and  the  relief  of  the  poor.^ 
Of  the  same  date  we  have  another  letter  from 
Gregory  to  the  Physician  Theodore,  in  which  he 
says  that  his  beloved  son,  the  Deacon  Sabinianus, 
on  his  return  to  him  had  brought  no  letter  from 
Theodore,  although  he  had  taken  to  him  what  had 
been  sent  for  the  poor.  On  this  lapse  he  pays 
his  correspondent  a  neat  compliment,  saying  he 
knew  the  reason  for  it.  It  was  that  he  would 
not  speak  by  letters  to  a  man  who  had  by  a 
good  deed  already  made  his  address  directly  to 
Almighty  God.^ 

In  November  597,  Gregory  writes  to  Amos, 
the  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  about  a  certain  Peter, 
an  acolyte,  whom  he  had  placed  under  the  Deacon 
Sabinianus,  his  ecclesiastical  representative  [responsa 
ecclesiastica  facienti)  in  the  Royal  City,  and  who 
had  fled  and  had  resorted  to  his  church,  and  bidding 
him  send    him    back.'^     This    is    the  last    occasion 

^Ed.v\\.i\.  -  E.and H.\\\.2i. 

*  lb,  vii.  25  ;  Barmby,  vii.  28,  *  Jb.  viii,  6, 


420     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

on  which  we   find  Sabinianus  occupying  the  very 
influential  post  of  apocrisiarms. 

From  a  letter  of  Gregory  written  to  him  at  a 
later  time,  it  is  clear  that  he  was  deposed  for  some 
fault  which  the  Pope  refers  to  in  the  phrase  ob  culpam 
praeteriti  excessus.  Gregory  commends  him  for  the 
alacrity  with  which  he  had  submitted  to  the  rebuke, 
as  appeared  from  the  letters  he  had  written  to  him- 
self. He  continues,  "  I  trust  in  the  compassion  of 
Almighty  God  that  His  Grace  will  so  protect  thee 
that,  having  been  thus  also  absolved  from  other 
sins,  thou  mayest  rejoice  in  having  wholesomely 
obeyed."^  It  would  be  interesting  to  know  what 
the  fault  of  Sabinianus  had  been,  for  he  afterwards 
became  Pope.  His  attitude  towards  the  memory 
and  reputation  of  Gregory,  after  he  had  succeeded 
him,  shows  that  the  latter's  treatment  of  him, 
althoup^h  submitted  to,  had  rankled.  He  was 
succeeded  as  apocrisiarms  by  Anatolius. 

Sabinian  had  been  already  superseded  when 
the  letter  to  Amos,  just  cited,  was  written,  for  in 
another  letter,  dated  in  June  597,  and  addressed 
to  Narses,  Gregory  says :  "  I  beg  your  most 
sweet  Charity  to  frequently  visit  my  most  beloved 
son  Anatolius,  whom  I  have  sent  to  represent  the 
Church  {ad  facienda  responsa  ecclesiae)  in  the  Royal 
City,  so  that  after  the  toils  he  endures  in  secular 
causes  he  may  find  rest  with  you  in  the  Word  of 
God,  and  wipe  away  the  sweat  of  this  his  earthly 
toil,  as  it  were,  with  a  white   napkin.     Commend 

'  IL.,  and  H.  viii.  24  ;  Barmby,  viii,  24. 


APPENDIX  III  421 

him  to  all  who  are  known  to  you,  though  I  am 
sure  that,  if  he  is  perfectly  known,  he  needs  no 
commendation.  Yet  do  you  show  with  regard 
to  him  how  much  you  love  the  holy  apostle  Peter, 
and  me."^  In  letters  dated  July  599,  Anatolius 
is  addressed  as  Deacon  at  Constantinople,  and  as 
Deacon  and  apocrisiarius  at  Constantinople  re- 
spectively.^ Anatolius  still  held  the  post  in  February 
601,^  but  he  seems  to  have  been  dead  in  January 
602,  for  in  a  letter  of  that  date  addressed  to  the 
subdeacon  John  of  Ravenna,  Gregory  speaks  of 
him  as  Anatolius  of  most  blessed  memory/  He 
was  succeeded  by  Boniface,  of  whom  we  shall  have 
more  to  say  presently. 

As  we  have  seen,  Anatolius  had  already  been 
appointed  apocrisiarius  in  June  597,  which  implies 
that  Sabinianus  had  relinquished  the  post  some 
months  before.  It  is  almost  certain  that  he  was, 
in  fact,  the  same  person  as  the  Sabinianus,  Bishop 
of  Jadera,  who  appears  in  that  character  for  the 
first  time  in  April  of  the  same  year,  and  who 
was  then  mixed  up  with  a  certain  Maximus  the 
Deacon.  The  latter  had  had  dealings  with  Sabin- 
ianus as  apocrisiarius,  as  we  previously  saw,^  and 
Gregory  addresses  him  in  various  letters  as  frater 
et  coepiscopus  noster,  frater  vestra,  dilectissime 
frater  and  frater  carissime.  In  a  letter  written 
in  June  598,  and  addressed  to  him  as  Bishop 
of  Jadera,  and  already  referred  to,  Gregory  says 

^  E.  and  H.  vii.  27  ;  Barmby,  vii.  30. 

2  E.  andH.  ix.  187,  188,  and  189. 

*  lb.  xi.  29.  *  lb.  xii.  6.  *  lb.  vii.  17. 


42  2     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

that  he  had  instructed  Anatolius  to  assist  him  in 
every  way.^  The  sentence  is  an  interesting  one. 
"  Diledissimo  auteniji/io  nostra  Anatolio  diacono  jmn 
et  pritis  et  nunc  iteruui  omnia  suptiliter  indicavimus 
hortantes  tit,  quicquid  ad  titilitatem  ac  quietem 
caritatis  vestrae  vel  filiorum  vesti'orum  pertinet^ 
creatoris  nostri  auxilio  suffragante  augere  stride 
ac  stiidiose  festinetT  This  mention  of  his  children 
may  explain  the  supersession  of  Sabinianus  after 
Gregory's  death.  This  is  the  last  time  we  read 
of  Sabinianus  as  Bishop  of  Jadera.  In  July  599 
we  have  two  letters  to  a  Sabinianus  (in  one  he  is 
called  Savinus).  He  is  styled  in  both  Bishop  of 
Callipolis  {j,.e.  Callipoli  in  Calabria),  and  it  would, 
in  fact,  seem  that  he  was  translated  to  that  See.^ 
He  does  not  occur  again  in  Gregory's  letters. 

On  the  death  of  Gregory  he  became  his 
successor,  havino^  ingratiated  himself  while  resident 
at  Constantinople  with  the  all-powerful  Emperor 
Phocas,  as  he  probably  had  ingratiated  himself 
also  with  the  Exarch  of  Ravenna.  It  would 
fit  in  with  his  having  been  Bishop  of  Jadera 
and  Callipolis  that  he  was  not  elected  until 
five  months  after  Gregory's  death,  namely,  on  the 
13th  of  September  604.  I  have  in  a  previous 
page  related  the  history  of  Sabinianus  as  Pope. 
As  apocrisiarius  he  was  superseded,  as  I  have  said, 
by  Anatolius,  and  Anatolius  by  Boniface. 

Boniface  occurs  several  times  in  Gregory's 
letters.     Thus,    a   letter   to    Anastasius,    Patriarch 

^  E.  and  H.  viii.  24.  2  £^^  j^.  205  and  206. 


APPENDIX  III  423 

of  Antioch,  written  in  February  591,^  was  sent, 
together  with  some  "  keys  of  St.  Peter,"  by  Boniface, 
who  is  there  styled  lator  (i.e.  messenger)  and 
defensor.  The  Pope  says  he  had  further  entrusted 
him  with  some  confidential  and  private  messages  for 
the  Patriarch.  A  second  letter  of  the  same  date 
was  sent  to  the  Archbishop  Anastasius  of  Corinth  by 
Boniface,  in  which  he  is  again  styled  lator  and 
defe7isor.  In  it  Gregory  informs  him  of  his  own 
election  to  the  Papacy."  From  a  letter  dated  July 
591,  it  seems  that  Boniface  had  been  sent  on  business 
to  Corsica,  and  in  its  first  sentence  Gregory  says 
his  son  Boniface  the  deacon  [Filhis  mens  Bonif alius 
diaconus)  had  brought  him  some  news  from  the 
island.^  In  April  593,  Boniface,  who  was  its  bearer, 
is  mentioned  in  a  letter  written  jointly  to  the  Abbot  of 
Palermo  and  to  the  Notary  and  Rector  of  the  Papal 
Patrimony  there,  in  which  he  is  styled  praesentitmt 
lator  Bonifatius  vir  clarissimus.^ 

From  a  letter  dated  September  593,  and  written 
by  Gregory  to  the  Archbishop  of  Milan,  it  would 
appear  that  Boniface  had  been  sent  there  and  had 
received  some  private  message  from  the  latter  to 
convey  to  the  Pope.  In  it,  Gregory  calls  Boniface 
"  My  most  beloved  son,  the  Deacon  Boniface " 
(Dilectissimus  filius  nteus  Bonifatius  diaconus).^  In 
a  letter  written  in  April  596  to  Castor  the  Notary, 
he  refers  to  filius  noster  diaco7ius  Bo7iifatius. 
In  it  he  bids  him  take  heed  to  the  letter  Boniface 


1  E.  and  H.  i 

.25. 

2  lb.  i.  26. 

'  lb.  i.  50. 

*  lb.  iii.  27, 

*  lb.  iv.  2. 

424     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

had  written  him  in  conjunction  with  the  Magnificent 
man  the  chartulary  Maurentius  ^  [quod  tibi  filius 
nosier  diaconus  Bonifatius  et  vir  magnificus 
Maurentius  chartularius  scripsit  sollicite  attende). 

In  March  598  Gregory  writes  a  letter  to 
Boniface  on  the  privileges  of  the  Defensores  or 
Guardians,  and  especially  of  the  seven  Regionary 
Defensors,  of  whom  Boniface  himself  was  the  head 
or  primicerms ,  a  post  which,  it  would  appear,  the 
Pope  now  definitely  establishes.  This  letter  is 
addressed  Bonifatio  pri7?io  defensori} 

In  a  letter  written  in  February  599,  mention  is 
made  in  the  title  of  Boniface,  Defensor.^  In  August 
601,  Gregory  writes  to  Boniface,  who  was  then 
Defensor  of  Corsica,  chiding  him  for  having 
permitted  the  Churches  of  Aleria  and  Ajaccio 
to  be  so  long  without  bishops.  He  bids  him 
also  see  to  it  that  erring  priests  were  tried 
and  punished  by  the  bishop  or  by  himself,  and 
adds  that  they  were  not  to  be  held  in  custody  by 
laymen  [a  laicis  teneanhir)} 

It  is  plain  from  these  notices  that  Boniface  was 
greatly  employed  and  trusted  by  the  Pope,  and  we 
now  find  him  promoting  him  to  a  much  more  im- 
portant post,  namely,  that  oi apocrisiarius,  or  nuncio, 
at  Constantinople.  Anatolius,  the  previous  holder 
of  the  office,  was  already  dead  in  January  602,  for 
in  a  letter  of  that  date  the  Pope  speaks  of  his 
dilectissime  memoriae!'     On  the  death  of  Anatolius 

^  E.  and  H.  vi.  31.  2  /^  yiii.  16  ;  Barmby,  viii.  13. 

^  E.  and  H.  ix.  no.  *  lb.  xi.  58  ;  Barmby,  xi.  ']']. 

«  E.  and  H.  xii.  6. 


APPENDIX  III  425 

there  seems  to  have  been  a  long  delay  in  the 
appointment  of  his  successor.  The  Pope,  in  a 
letter  to  Phocas  written  in  July  603,  explains  the 
reason  why.  He  says  :  "  The  reason  your  Serenity 
has  not  had  a  deacon  of  the  Apostolic  See 
resident  at  the  Court,  according  to  ancient  custom, 
is  that  all  the  ministers  of  this  our  Church  shrank 
and  fled  with  fear  from  times  of  such  oppression 
and  hardship  "  [i.e.  those  of  the  Emperor  Maurice) ; 
"  it  was  not  possible  to  impose  on  any  of  them  the 
duty  of  going  to  the  Royal  City  to  remain  at  the 
Court.  But  now  that  they  have  learnt  that  your 
clemency,  by  the  ordering  of  God's  grace,  has 
attained  to  the  summit  of  Empire,  those  who  had 
before  greatly  feared  to  go  there,  hasten  even  of 
themselves,  to  your  feet,  moved  thereto  by  joy. 
But  seeing  that  some  of  them  are  so  weak  from  old 
age  as  to  be  hardly  able  to  bear  the  toil,  and  some 
are  deeply  engaged  in  ecclesiastical  cares,  I  have 
sent  the  bearer  of  these  presents,  who  was  the  first 
of  all  our  guardians  [defensores],  had  been  long  known 
to  me  for  his  diligence,  and  approved  in  life,  faith, 
and  character,  and  I  have  judged  him  fit  to  be  sent 
to  the  feet  of  your  Piety.  I  have  accordingly,  by 
God's  permission,  made  him  a  deacon,  and  have  been 
at  pains  to  send  him  to  you  with  all  speed,  that  he 
may  be  able,  when  a  convenient  time  is  found,  to 
inform  your  Clemency  of  all  that  is  being  done  in 
these  parts.  To  him  I  beg  your  Serenity  to  deign 
to  incline  your  pious  ears,  that  you  may  find  it  in 
your  power  to  have  pity  on  us  all,  the  more  speedily, 


426     SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 

as  you  learn  the  more  truly  from  his  account  what 
our  affliction  is."  He  then  goes  on  to  say  how  they 
had  for  thirty-five  years  been  sorely  oppressed  by 
the  Lombards.^ 

In  a  letter  of  the  same  date,  addressed  to 
Cyriacus,  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  he  com- 
mends to  him  "our  most  beloved  common  son, 
the  Deacon  Boniface."^  In  another  letter  to 
Eulogius  of  Alexandria,  Gregory  says  he  had 
heard  from  his  respo?isalis,  who  was  then  living  in 
the  Royal  City,  that  Eulogius  had  become  blind, 
and  writes  to  console  him  accordingly.^ 

In  September  603,  Gregory  writes  to  Vitalis 
the  Defensor,  telling  him  to  go  to  Sardinia,  where 
the  people  were  being  harassed,  and  saying  he  had 
sent  word  to  his  dear  son  Boniface  the  Deacon, 
to  bring  the  case  before  the  authorities  of  the 
Court  at  Constantinople.* 

In  November  603,  Gregory  writes  to  Boniface 
the  Deacon  at  Constantinople,  sending  him  letters 
of  complaint  which  had  reached  him  from  the 
Bishop  of  Ancyra  in  regard  to  the  efforts  of  the 
Bishop  of  Euria  in  Epirus  to  subject  his  see  to  his 
jurisdiction,  and  bidding  him  lay  the  matter  before 
the  Emperor,  whom  he  styles  "  His  Piety."  ^ 

This  is  the  last  of  Gregory's  letters  to  Boniface 
that  is  extant,  and  was  written  only  a  few  months 

^  E.  and  H.  xiii.  41  ;  Barmby,  xiii.  38. 
^  E.  and  H.  xiii.  43  ;  Barmby,  xiii.  43. 
^  E.  and  H.  xiii.  45  ;  Barmby,  xiii.  42. 

*  E.  and  H.  xiv.  2  ;  Barmby,  xiv.  21. 

*  E.  and  H.  xiv.  8  ;  Barmby,  xiv.  13. 


APPENDIX  III  427 

before  the  great  Pope's  death,  at  which  date  he 
doubtless  still  held  the  post  of  nuncio.  On  the 
death  of  Sabinianus,  Boniface  was  appointed  his 
successor  as  Pope,  doubtless  by  the  influence  of 
Phocas,  who  must  have  known  him  well. 


INDEX 


Abubekr,  Khalif,  272,  273. 

Abyssinia,  King  of,  272. 

Acta  Sanctorum,  Ixxv,  ^y  n.,  179 
n.,  180  n.,  188  n.,  216,  335  n. 

Adamnan,  Vit.  Columbae,  63, 
112  n.,  129  n.,  357  n.,  358  n. 

Adrian,  Abbot,  Ixviii. 

Adulwald,  241.    See  also  Eadbald. 

/Edbald.     See  Eadbald. 

^dilhun,  265. 

/Edilthryd,  265. 

^dwin,  Kingof  Deira,lettertohim 
from  Boniface  v.,  Ixii,  Ixxi, 
Ixxii  ;  sheltered  by  the 
monks  of  Bangor,  166,  251  ; 
driven  from  his  kingdom  by 
his  brother-in-law  ^thelfrid, 
247,  250  ;  shelters  with  Red- 
wald,  who  refuses  to  give 
him  up,  247,  251  ;  Bede's 
story  of  Redwald's  deter- 
mination to  give  him  up  and 
of  a  friend  who  offers  to  con- 
duct him  to  safety,  251  ;  and  of 
an  apparition  which  he  after- 
wards recognised  as  Paulinus, 
252  ;  after  the  death  of  yEthel- 
frid,  he  unites  Northumbria 
under  his  sceptre,  extends 
his  kingdom  to  the  English 
Pennines,  253,  and  possibly 
from  sea  to  sea ;  gives  its 
name  to  Edinburgh,  conquers 
North  Wales  with  Anglesea 
and  the  Isle  of  Man,  254 ;  the 
extent  of  his  kingdom,  his 
firm  and  just  rule,  255  ; 
marries  vEthelberga,  and 
promises  to  accept  Chris- 
tianity, 256  ;  Cwichelm,  King 
of  Wessex,  employs  Eomer 
^o  a,ssassinate  him,  257,  xcvii  ; 


overcomes  the  West  Saxons, 
and  still  further  delays 
accepting  Christianity,  258  ; 
Paulinus  reminds  him  of  his 
vision,  he  consults  his  coun- 
sellors before  deciding,  259- 
261  ;  gifts  sent  to  him  from 
Boniface  v.,  xcviii  ;  Coifi  de- 
stroys the  idol  temples,  262, 
xcviii  ;  ^dwin  baptized  with 
all  his  nobles  and  a  great 
crowd  of  people,  262  ;  he 
commences  to  build  a  stone 
church  at  York,  263  ;  slain  by 
Caedwalla  and  Penda  at 
Haethfelth,  326;  his  head 
taken  to  York  and  buried  in 
St.  Peter's  there,  327 ;  his 
body  recovered  and  buried 
at  Whitby,  xcix. 

^Ifret.     See  ^thelfrid. 

yElfric,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
92. 

yElfric,  Homilies,  64. 

/Ella,  King  of  Deira,  250. 

/Elstan,  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 
Canterbury,  180. 

.'Ethelberga,  Ixii,  Ixx,  Ixxi,  256, 
xcviii,  330,  331. 

yEthelberht,  King  of  Kent, 
Gregory's  letter  to  him,  xxxiv, 
xxxvi,  Iv,  Ixxiv  ;  held  the 
hegemony  of  the  Anglian  and 
Saxon  princes,  extent  of  his 
authority,  was  married  to  a 
Frankish  princess,  39  ;  possi- 
bly before  he  came  to  the 
throne,  40  ;  buried  in  SS. 
Peter  and  Paul,  43  ;  called 
Ealdberht  in  Nennius,  49  ; 
did  he  adopt  the  name  yEthel- 
berhtat  his  baptism?  his  gene- 


\n 


430    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


alogy  and  different  names  in 
various  authorities,  50 ;  the 
inconsistency  of  the  dates 
given  for  his  life,  50,  51  ;  a 
fabulous  battle  in  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  Chronicle^  51  ;  the 
extent  of  his  kingdom,  51,52; 
its  capital,  52-56;  interviewed 
by  the  interpreters  from 
Augustine,  orders  the  mis- 
sionaries to  remain  in  Thanet, 
and  promises  them  his  protec- 
tion, 61 ;  summons  Augustine 
and  his  monks  to  a  conference, 
62  ;  commands  Augustine  to 
deliver  his  message,  his 
reply,  he  offers  the  mission 
quarters  in  Canterbury,  64  ; 
gives  them  a  house  in  Stable- 
gate,  67,  90 ;  said  to  have 
given  up  his  own  house  to  the 
mission  and  to  have  gone  to 
live  at  Reculver,  68 ;  baptized 
at  Canterbury,  uncertain  at 
what  church,  ']']  ;  builds  and 
endows  the  monastery,  98, 
214  ;  Gregory's  letter  to  him, 
brought  from  Rome  by  Au- 
gustine's missionaries,  135  ; 
his  supremacy  seems  to  have 
extended  over  the  British  as 
well  as  the  Saxons,  153  ; 
builds  St.  Paul's,  170;  the 
church  he  built  at  Rochester, 
172,  173  ;  a  doubtful  letter  to 
him  from  Pope  Boniface,  211, 
212;  dateof  his  death,  buried 
in  St.  Augustine's  Abbey 
Church,  xciii,  213 ;  removal  of 
hisbodyattherebuildingof  St. 
Augustine's  Abbey,  182,  216; 
held  to  be  a  saint,  2 1 3, 216;  his 
shrine  above  the  high  altar, 
213;  his  dooms, Ixxiv,  213,214; 
at  his  death,  or  perhaps  con- 
version, the  hegemony  passed 
from  Kent  to  East  Anglia, 
he  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
.(^dbald  or  Eadbald,  230. 

./tthelberht.  King,  Dooms  of, 
Ixxiv,  213,  214. 

^thelfrid.  King  of  Bernicia,  his 
campaign  against  the  Welsh, 
who  were  sheltering  his 
brother-in-ljiw,  ^^dwin,  King 


of  Deira,  165-166,  247,  251  ; 
attacks  ^dwin  and  wrests 
Deira  from  him,  250,  and 
pursues  him,  250,  251  ;  tries 
to  get  Redwald  to  kill  or 
deliver  up  ^dwin  to  him, 
247,  251  ;  in  a  battle  which 
follows  is  killed  by  Redwald, 
247,  253  ;  Bede's  description 
of  him,  249 ;  defeats  Aidan, 
King  of  Scots,  250. 

.^thelheard.  Bishop,  233. 

.^therius.   Bishop  of  Lyons,  31, 

87,  133- 

Agapetus,  Pope,  16,  408,  409. 

Agatho,  Pope,  390-397. 

Age  of  Justinian.  See  Holmes 
(G.  W.). 

Agilfus,  Bishop  of  Metz,  133. 

Aidan,  King  of  the  Scots  of  Argyll, 
250. 

Ailmer,  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 
Canterbury,  afterwards  Bish- 
op of  Shireburn,  180. 

Aix,  29,  32. 

Aix,  Bishop  of.     See  Protasius. 

Albinus,  Abbot  of  St.  Peter  and 
St.  Paul,  Canterbury,  Ixvii, 
Ixviii,  Ixix. 

Alcuin,  Epistles,  xciii  n. 

Alcuin,    Moniifnenta   Alcuiiiana, 

233- 

Aldwulf,  King  of  East  Anglia, 
246. 

Alexander,  Pope,  181. 

Amandus,  St.,  Bishop  of  Maes- 
trich,  307. 

Ammianus  Marcellinus,  xc. 

Anatolius,  Nuncio  at  Constanti- 
nople, 422. 

Anatolius,  St.,  Bishop  of  Laodi- 
caea,  159. 

Ancient  Libraries  of  Canterbury 
and  Dover.     6"if^  James  (Dr.). 

Angers,  Bishop  of.     See  Licinius. 

Anglia  Sacra.  See  Wharton, 
Henry. 

Anglians,  Church  of  the,  first  use 
of  the  phrase,  105. 

Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle,\\x\\\,  49, 
50,  51,  93  n.,  169,  177,  258, 
268,  269  n.,  324,  334. 

Anna,  King  of  East  Anglia,  en- 
dows a  monastery  at  Burgh 
Castle,  322  ;  succeeds  Ecgric, 


INDEX 


431 


killed  by  Penda,  his  four 
saintly  dauo^hters,  324  ;  suc- 
ceeded by  /Ethelheie,  325. 

Annates  Ca?Hbriae,  155  n.,  251  n. 

Anna/es  Paulini^  xcii  n. 

Annals  of  the  Bodleian  Library. 
See  Macray. 

Annals  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral. 
See  Milman  (Dean). 

Annals  of  Ulster.,    251    n.,  354- 

357. 
Antioch,  Council  of,  175. 
Archaeologia    Cantiana,    70     n., 

76,  172-173- 
ArchcEological  Journal,  xc  n.,  44, 

45,    46,   47,    72,    7?,-7(i,    93, 

94,  95,  97,  98,  264,  330,  331, 

332  n. 
Aregius,  Bishop  of  Gap,  128,  133. 
Aregius,  Patrician  of  Burgundy, 

29,  33- 
Aries,  33,  87,  xcvi. 
Aries,  Archbishop  of     See  Ver- 

gilius,  Licerius. 
Aries,  Council  of,  iii. 
Armagh,  Bishop  of.     See  Teran- 

anus. 
Arnulf,  Bishop  of  Metz,  223,  309, 

310,  311- 

Asser,  57  n. 

Arts  iti  Early  England.  See 
Brown  (J.  B.). 

Augustine,  St.,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  on  his  consecra- 
tion as  Bishop,  sends  a  letter 
to  the  Pope,  xxxiv  ;  Prior  of 
St.  Andrew's  Monastery,  and 
selected  by  Gregory  to  lead 
his  Anglian  mission,  25  ;  said, 
in  a  doubtful  letter,  to  have 
been  a  pupil  of  Felix,  Bishop 
of  Messina,  26,  and  to 
have  been  cell-companion  to 
Gregory ;  not  the  type  of  man 
likely  to  be  a  successful  leader, 
27  ;  sets  out,  probably  from 
Ostia,  by  sea  to  Lerins,  re- 
ports to  Gregory  on  the 
monastery  there,  28  ;  to  Mar- 
seilles and  Aix,  returns  to 
Rome  on  account  of  difficul- 
ties, 29  ;  returns  the  same 
day  with  letters  of  introduc- 
tion to  Frankish  princes  and 
bishops,  30  ;    probably  com- 


missioned to  visit  the  various 
churches  of  Gaul  and  report 
to  the  Pope,  rejoins  his  com- 
panions at  Aix,  32  ;  thence 
to  Aries,  33  ;  Vienne,  Lyons, 
Autun,  and  Orleans,  34  ; 
legends  of  him  in  the  west 
of  France,  35  ;  two  years 
occupied  in  visiting  the 
churches  of  Gaul,  37  ;  reaches 
the  English  Channel,  prob- 
able port  of  embarkation,  56  ; 
place  of  landing,  59,  xc  ; 
reasons  for  rejecting  the 
Ebbs  Fleet  conjecture,  60 ; 
brought  interpreters  from 
Gaul,  sends  one  of  them  to 
yEthelberht  to  tell  him  the 
glad  tidings,  he  promises 
protection,  61  ;  summoned  to 
confer  with  the  king,  62  ; 
traditional  description  of  his 
personal  appearance,  63  ; 
commanded  to  deliver  his 
message,  Bede's  account  of 
the  king's  reply,  quarters  at 
Canterbury  are  offered,  64  ; 
the  progress  thither,  64-67  ; 
secures  consecration  as 
bishop,  according  to  Bede,  at 
Aries,  but  the  Pope  speaks  of 
"  Bishops  of  Germany,"  87  ; 
the  date  of  his  consecration, 
on  his  return  to  Britain 
sends  Laurence  and  Peter  to 
Rome  to  tell  the  Pope  that 
the  English  had  accepted 
the  faith,  and  that  he  had 
been  made  bishop,  xxxiv,  88 ; 
ceased  to  be  abbot,  but  prob- 
ably still  lived  in  the  monas- 
tery, his  diocese  co-extensive 
with  ^thelberht's  kingdom, 
91  ;  his  letter  to  the  Pope 
unanswered  for  three  years, 
99  ;  the  delay  unexplained, 
his  letters  had  contained  a 
series  of  difficult  cases  to 
which  the  Pope  now  replies, 
100 ;  notwithstanding  doubts 
of  some  writers,  this  corre- 
spondence maintained  to  be 
genuine,  10 1  ;  the  arguments 
stated,  102,  103  ;  the  ques- 
tions stated,  with  Gregory's 


432    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


responsions,  104-114  ;  one  of 
the  questions  in  some  ver- 
sions evidently  interpolated, 
113  n.  ;  the  books  which 
Gregory  sent  to  him,  115; 
the  sacred  vessels,  124;  the 
vestments,  124,  126,  127, 
xc;  the  relics,  125;  further 
injunctions  from  the  Pope 
with  regard  to  heathen  tem- 
ples, 128-130;  to  beware  of 
presumption,  138  ;  to  erect  a 
Metropolitan  See  of  London, 
139  ;  and  of  York,  subject  to 
London,  that  the  bishops  of 
the  British  Church  are  to  be 
subject  to  him,  140,  142  ; 
twelve  dioceses  to  be  formed, 
subject  to  Augustine  during 
his  life,  and  afterwards  to 
London,  141  ;  his  position 
with  regard  to  the  British 
bishops,  142-144  ;  with  the 
help  of  /Ethelberht  summons 
the  British  bishops  to  a  con- 
ference, 152;  begins  by  try- 
ing to  persuade  them  to  con- 
form, 158,  159  ;  the  details  of 
discussion  not  known,  161  ; 
the  conference  not  very  fruit- 
ful, story  of  a  miracle  wrought 
by  him  considered  an  inter- 
polation, 162  :  calls  a  second 
conference,  offends  the  British 
bishops  by  his  haughty  atti- 
tude, he  does  not  press  the 
matter  of  the  tonsure,  164  ; 
tells  the  British  bishops  if 
they  will  not  preach  to  the 
Anglians  they  will  suffer 
death  at  their  hands,  so  is 
thought  by  some  to  have 
inspired  the  massacre  of 
Bangor,  165  ;  he  ordains  two 
bishops,  168 — Mellitus  to  the 
East  Saxons,  169  ;  Justus  to 
the  See  of  Rochester,  171  ; 
baptizes  St.  Livinius,  his  last 
recorded  act  an  uncanonical 
one,  he  passes  over  the  two 
bishops  he  had  ordained, 
173  ;  and  appoints  Laurence 
the  priest  as  his  successor, 
and  ordains  him  to  the  See 
of  Qi^Aterbury  whilst  he  him- 


self still  filled  it,  174;  the 
year  of  his  death  not  certainly 
known,  177  ;  devotions  to 
him,  his  burial-place,  178, 
179,  xciii  ;  his  epitaph,  179; 
Gocelin's  account  of  his  trans- 
lation, 179-186;  the  remains 
separated  into  two  portions 
by  Abbot  Wido  and  buried 
in  different  parts  of  the  abbey, 
186  ;  Gocelin's  account  of  his 
miracles,  188-190;  the  results 
of  his  labours,  190-192;  rit- 
ual introduced  by  him,  192, 
xciii-xciv  ;  an  estimate  of  his 
character,  195-197  ;  his  death 
probably  the  same  year  as 
Gregory's,  198. 

Augustine  and  his  Companions. 
See  Browne  (Bishop). 

Augustine's  fellow-missionaries  : 
but  little  record  of  their  per- 
sonal views,  none  of  their 
writings  have  survived,  viii ; 
very  simple  folk,  xvi  ;  all 
monks,  xx,  104  ;  naturally 
unsympathetic  to  the  natives, 
xxi  ;  their  success  compared 
with  that  of  the  missions 
from  lona  and  Lindisfarne, 
doubtful  how  much  of  their 
ritual  was  derived  from  that 
of  Gaul,  xxii ;  all  chosen  from 
the  monks  of  St.  Andrew's 
Monastery  at  Rome,  15  ;  none 
amongst  them  who  knew  the 
ways  of  the  world,  27  ;  fearful 
of  the  dangers  of  the  way, 
send  Augustine  back  to  the 
Pope  asking  to  be  relieved  of 
the  journey,  29 ;  the  Pope's 
letter  to  them,  30  ;  rejoined 
by  Augustine  at  Aix,  32  ;  two 
years  spent  in  France  on  the 
way  to  Britain,  37  ;  they 
reach  the  English  Channel, 
probable  port  of  embarkation, 
a  numerous  party,  56  ;  their 
landing-place,  59  ;  reasons 
for  rejecting  the  Ebbs  Fleet 
conjecture,  60  ;  knew  no 
English,  had  Frankish  intei- 
preters  with  them,  were  about 
forty  in  number,  ordered  by 
Ethelberht:    to     remain     xxx 


INDEX 


433 


Thanet,  and  are  promised 
protection,  6 1  ;  summoned  to 
confer  with  the  King,  62  ; 
Bede's  description  of  the  pro- 
cession, 63  ;  quarters  offered 
to  them  at  Canterbury,  64 ; 
their  progress  thither,  64-67  ; 
their  dress,  65  ;  their  pro- 
cessional htany  and  anthem, 
65,  66,  xc  ;  y4ithelberht  gives 
them  a  house  in  Stable- 
gate,  67,  90  ;  they  proceed 
to  build  the  monastery,  and 
take  over  the  Church  of  St. 
Martin,  68  ;  probably  some  of 
the  monks  ordained  priests, 
91  ;  two  of  their  number  sent 
to  Rome  with  a  letter  from 
Augustine  to  the  Pope,  where 
they  remained  three  years, 
99  ;  they  return  with  several 
new  recruits  and  various 
articles  for  use  in  the  service 
of  the  Church,  100,  114;  over- 
taken by  a  messenger  from 
the  Pope  with  a  further  letter 
for  Mellitus,  128  ;  commen- 
datory letters  given  by  the 
Pope  to  the  messengers  of 
Augustine  for  the  bishops  of 
Gaul,  132-133  ;  to  the  Kings 
of  Austrasia,  Burgundy,  and 
Neustria,  and  to  Queen 
Brunichildis,  134;  to  King 
vEthelberht,  135;  and  Queen 
Bertha,  136,  137. 

Augustine,  St.,  of  Hippo,  Epistles, 
66  n. 

Augustine's  Oak,  157,  162. 

Aust  Cliff,  on  the  Severn,  157, 
158. 

Autun,  Bishop  of.     See  Syagrius. 

Avars,  the,  199,  218,  219,  220. 

Baber,  H.  H.,  in  Introduction  to 
IVickliffe's  New  Testament^ 
119. 

Bangor,  massacre  at,  166,  327. 

Baptism,  the  Service  described, 
78-86  ;  differences  between 
the  usages  of  the  British 
Church  and  Rome,  1 50- 
152. 

Baring-Gould,    S.,   Lives  of  the 
Saints,  129  n. 
28 


Barmby,  Dr.  J.,  Epistles  of 
Gregory,  xxxii,  6  n.,  7  n.,  24  n., 
25  n.,  26  n.,  28  n.,  29  n.,  31  n., 
32n.,  33  n.,  34  n.,  35  n.,  37  n., 
102  n.,  133  n.,  134  n.,  137, 
139  n.,  140  n.,  145,  161,  419  n., 
420  n.,  421  n.,  424  n.,  426  n. 

Barmby,  in  Dictionary  of  Chris- 
tian Biography,  203  n.,  408, 
414,  415  n. 

Baronius,  Cardinal,  21. 

Bede,  the  Venerable,  Historia 
Ecclesiastica,  xxxi,  xxxiii, 
xxxiv,  XXXV,  xxxvi,  xxxvii,  Iviii, 
lix,  Ix,  Ixiii,  Ixvi ,  Ixvii-lxxiv, 
xcii,  xcviii  n.,  xcix  n.,  12, 
13,  28  n.,  29,  30  n.,  40,  50,51, 
52,  57,  58,  60,  6r,  62,  63,  64, 
65,  67,  69,  70,  85  n.,  87,  88,  90, 
98,  99,  102,  105,  113  n.,  130, 
139,  140  n.,  153,  156,  158, 
159  n.,  161,  162  n.,  163,  166, 
168,  169  n.,  170,  171,  174, 
175  n.,  177,  178,  179,  193, 
208,  209  n.,  210,  211  n.,  212  n., 
213,  230,  231,  232,  233  n., 
234  n.,  235  n.,  236,  240,  241, 

242  n.,  243  n.,  245,  246,  247, 
249,  250,  251  n.,  253  n.,  254, 
255,  256,  257,  258  n.,  259  n., 
262,  265  n.,  266  n.,  267  n.,  268, 
269,  282,  291,  318,  319,  321, 

322,  323  n.,  326,  327  n.,  328, 
329,  330,  Zy^,  334,  335,  336, 
337,  I2>f>,  339,  359  n.,  360  n., 
362  n.,  364  n. 

Bede,  the  Venerable,  De  Temp. 
Rati  one,  130  n. 

Bede,  the  Venerable,  Historia 
Abbatum,  337  n. 

Bede's  Writings,  edited  by  C. 
Plummer,  Ix  n.,  Ixvii,  l.xx, 
Ixxi,  xciv  n.,  26  n.,  31  n., 
42  n.,  43,  56  n.,  66  n.,  69  n., 
88  n.,  93,  99  n.,  100  n.,  103, 
109,  no,  112  n.,  125,  127  n., 
130  n.,  153,  157  n.,  163  n.,  172, 
175  n.,  177  n.,  209,210,  212  n., 
214  n.,  230  n.,  238  n.,  240,  242, 

243  n.,  244  n.,  265  n.,  266  n., 

323,  324,  325,  326  n.,  336, 
360  n.,  363  n. 

Bede's  Writings,  edited  by  Smith, 
Ixiii,  xcv  n.,  41,  42  n.,  265  n., 
266  n.,  269  n.,  320  n.,  324  n. 


434    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


Bede's  Writings,  edited  by  Rev. 
Jos.  Stevenson,  Ixvii,  Ixix,  Ixx, 

157- 

Belisarius,  409,  410. 

Benedict  I.,  Pope,  11,  12. 

Benedict,  St.,  rule  of,  xv,  xvi,  xvii, 
24. 

Benjamin,  a  Jew  of  Tiberias,  222. 

Bercta.     See  Bertha. 

Berctgils.  See  Boniface,  Bishop 
of  Dunwich. 

Bernard,  St.,  of  Clairvaux,  Vita 
Malacliiae^  151. 

Bertha,  wife  of  Ethelberht,  King  of 
Kent,  xxxiv,  xxxvi;  a  daughter 
of  Charibert,  King  of  Paris, 
39,  Ixxxix  ;  called  Ethelberga 
by  the  Pope,  accompanied  to 
Britain  by  her  Christian 
chaplain,  40 ;  the  probable 
date  of  her  marriage,  42  ; 
buried  in  SS.  Peter  and  Paul, 
43  ;  she  possibly  sent  the 
message  to  Rome  that  her 
people  were  anxious  to  be 
converted,  48  ;  her  influence 
on  Ethelberht  evident  in 
his  reception  of  the  mission, 
62  ;  the  Pope's  letter  to  her 
brought  by  Augustine's  mis- 
sionaries, 136,  137. 

Birch,  W.  de  G.,  Cartularium 
Saxonicum,  Ivi,  171  n. 

Bishop,  Mr.  Edmund,  loi  n. 

Bishops,  consecration  of,  88  ; 
Gregory's  responsion  upon, 
II  I. 

Boniface,  Bishop  of  Dunwich, 
326. 

Boniface  II.,  Pope,  407,  408. 

Boniface  ill..  Nuncio  at  Constanti- 
nople, 204  ;  doubts  as  to  his 
identity  with  Boniface  iv., 
203  ;  what  is  said  of  him  is 
very  little  and  all  from  one 
source  :  said  to  have  conse- 
crated twenty-one  bishops  in 
eight  months,  204  ;  reasons 
for  the  interpolation  of  his 
name,  205. 

Boniface  iv..  Pope,  Columban's 
letter  to  him,  145  ;  was  he 
the  successor  of  Sabinianus  ? 
203-205  ;  a  protege  of  Pope 
Gregory  who  had  been  Papal 


Nuncio  at  Imperial  Court, 
206  ;  asks  Phocas  to  give 
him  the  Pantheon,  and  dedi- 
cates it  to  Christian  worship, 
206-208,  211,  236,  237; 
doubtful  letters  from  him  to 
Lawrence  and  /Ethelberht, 
211  ;  his  death  and  epitaph, 
237,  422,  423,  424,  425,  426, 
427. 

Boniface  v.,  Pope,  his  letters 
to  Justus  and  to  Edwin  and 
yEthelberga,  Ixii,  Ixx,  Ixxi, 
xcviii  ;  the  successor  of  Deus- 
dedit,  his  legislation  and  acts, 
237,  238,  239  ;  his  death  and 
burial,  239  ;  his  letter  to 
Mellitus  and  Justus,  240,  242. 

Boniface,  St.,  xxxi,  102,  152,  176. 

Boniface,  St.,  Epistles,  xcv  n., 
103  n.,  109,  no  n. 

Books  sent  by  Gregory  to  Augus- 
tine, 100,  II 4- 1 2 3. 

Bossuet,  J.  B.,  Defensio  Declara- 
tiojtis  Conventus  Cleri  Galli- 
ca7ti,  400  n. 

Braulio,  Bishop  of  Saragossa, 
280. 

Bridges,  John,  History  of  North- 
ampton, 131. 

Bright,  Dr.  W.,  Early  English 
Church  History,  lii,  liii,  Iv,  Ivii, 
Ixxvii,  xciii,  xcvi  n.,  xcviii  n., 
xcix,26  n., 30,42  n.,63  n.,67n., 
72,  85,  92  n.,  105  n.,  107,  III, 
1 12,  114,  126  n.,  129  n.,  130  n., 
141,  147,  148  n.,  149  n.,  150  n., 
159 n.,  162,  i63n.,  171,  175  n., 
177,  207  n.,  234  n.,  236  n., 
243  n.,  247  n.,  248  n.,  266  n., 
268,  319  n.,  320,321. 

Brightvvald,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 179. 

Britain,  under  Roman  rule,  1,2; 
assailed  by  foes  from  Ireland 
and  Germany,  3  ;  Procopius, 
fables  about,  4  ;  state  of 
civilisation  in  Augustine's 
time,  38. 

British  bishops  —  committed  by 
Gregory  to  Augustine's  care, 
113;  want  of  tact  on  the 
Pope's  part,  142  ;  differences 
in  discipline  between  the 
Celtic    Church    and    Rome, 


INDEX 


435 


the  perverse  to  be  corrected 
by  authority  :  reasons  why 
this  attitude  did  not  succeed, 
143  ;  not  originally  antagon- 
istic to  Rome,  145  ;  wherein 
their  "  Use "  differed  from 
Rome,  146-152  ;  in  the  time 
of  celebrating  Easter,  146, 
149)  159;  i"  regard  to  the 
tonsure,  149,  150;  in  the 
sacrament  of  baptism,  150- 
152  ;  summoned  to  a  confer- 
ence with  Augustine,  153  ; 
the  date,  names  of  the 
bishops  unknown,  they  were 
not  diocesan  bishops,  153, 
but  the  senior  ecclesiastical 
personage  in  each  monastic 
community;  the  contrary  view 
based  on  late  documents  and 
mere  conjecture,  154;  the 
first  conference  representa- 
tive of  South  Wales  only,  the 
second  of  the  whole  Church 
in  Wales,  155  ;  the  place  of 
meeting,  156-158;  not  strange 
that  native  Church  should 
object  to  supremacy  of  a 
mission  sent  to  their  invad- 
ers, 161  ;  the  first  confer- 
ence at  Augustine's  Oak  not 
very  fruitful,  an  appeal  to 
God  for  a  sign,  each  party 
prays  for  the  recovery  of  a 
blind  man,  the  miracle  ap- 
pears to  be  an  interpolation, 
162  ;  called  to  a  second  con- 
ference, they  seek  the  advice 
of  a  hermit,  who  advises 
them  to  follow  Augustine  if 
he  is  humble,  163  ;  they  de- 
cline to  alter  the  time  of 
Easter,  or  their  service  of 
baptism,  and  will  not  preach 
to  the  Anglians,  164  ;  Augus- 
tine's minatory  attitude  to 
them,  165  ;  the  underlying 
reasons  for  their  decision, 
167. 

Brompton,  Joannes,  Chronicott, 
xcvii  n. 

Brou,  Father,  102  n. 

Brown,  Prof.  G.  Baldwin,  Arts  in 
Early  England,  74,  76  n,, 
97  n. 


Browne,  G.  F.,  Bishop  of  Bristol, 
Alcuin  of  York,  264,  265  n. 

Browne,  G.  P\,  Bishop  of  Bristol, 
Augustine  and  his  Com- 
panions, Ivi,  Ixxvii,  Ixxviii, 
58  n.,  59  n.,  63  n.,  92,  105,  157, 
165  210,  215,  232,  267  n., 
328. 

Browne,  G.  F.,  Bishop  of  Bristol, 
77/1?  Christian  Church  in  these 
Islands  before  the  Coming  of 
Augustine,  41  n.,  43  n.,  194, 
195  n.,  213. 

Browne,  G.  F.,  Bishop  of  Bristol, 
Conversion  of  the  Heptarchy, 
Ixxviii,  224  n.,  246,  262, 
328. 

lirunichildis,  Queen  of  the  Franks, 
xxxiii,  xxxiv,  10,  14,  34,  88, 
134,  222,  223-226,  310. 

Bruns,  Canones,  66  n. 

Bubonic  plague  in  sixth  and 
seventh  centuries,  343-365  ; 
its  effect  described  by  Gibbon, 
344-348  ;  by  Prof.  Bury,  348- 
350 ;  in  the  East,  350 ;  in 
Italy,  351  ;  in  Gaul,  352,  353, 
354;  in  Ireland,  354-357;  in 
Wales,  357;  in  Scotland,  358  ; 
in  England,  358-364. 

Bund,  Willis,  The  Celtic  Church 
in  Wales,  154,  155  n. 

Bury,  Prof.  J.,  History  of  the 
Later  Rofnan  Empire,  200  n., 
201  n.,  218,  219,  272  n.,  273, 
274,  275,  297,  303,  349- 

Byron,  Lord,  Childe  Harold, 
201  n. 

Byzantium,  authorities  for  history 
of,  Ixvi. 

Byzantium.  See  under  Maurice, 
Phocas,  Heraclitus,  Constan- 
tine  III.  and  iv.,  and  Con- 
stantine  11. 

Cabellorum.      See     Chalons-sur- 

Saone. 
Cadvan,  a  king  in  Wales,  165. 
Caedwalla,  King  of  the  Britons, 

326,  327. 
Caesar's   voyages  to    Britain  and 

their  results,  i,  2,  3. 
Cambrai,  Bishop  of.     See  Gerard. 
Camden,  W.,  Britannia^  266  n., 

321. 


436    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


Candidus,  Abbot  of  St.  Andrews, 

25. 
Candidus,  protector  of  the  papal 

patrimony  in  Gaul,  xxxii,  6, 

25,  32,  33,  35- 

Canterbury,  the  palace  of  yEthel- 
berht  was  just  outside  its 
walls,  the  division  of  the 
Roman  road  from  London  to 
the  three  Kentish  harbour 
fortresses, 52  ;  firstmentioned 
by  Ptolemy,  a  walled  town, 
ruined  and  abandoned  on  the 
withdrawal  of  the  Romans, 
53  ;  Roman  remains,  54  ;  the 
gates  and  markets,  55  ; 
quarters  there  assigned  to 
the  mission  by  ,4£thelberht, 
64,  67  ;  not  intended  to  re- 
main a  Metropolitan  See 
after  the  death  of  Augustine, 
129,  141,  142  ;  the  prayers  of 
Mellitus  stay  a  conflagration 
here,  241. 

Canterbury,  Archbishops  of.  See 
Augustine,  Laurence,  Melli- 
tus, Justus,  Honorius,  Deus- 
dedit,  Theodore,  Brightwald, 
Nothelm,  Ecgbert. 

Canterbury,  Chapel  of  the  Four 
Crowned  Ones,  236. 

Canterbury,  Christ  Church  Cathe- 
dral, 77  ;  its  dedication,  92  ; 
no  remains  of  it  e.xisting,  de- 
scribed by  Eadmer,  93,  96, 
xc  ;  Mr.  Micklethwaite's  de- 
scription of  the  plan,  94-96  ; 
the  elevation,  97,  98. 

Canterbury,  Church  of  "the  Holy 
Mother  of  God,"  181,  234. 

Canterbury,  St.  Augustine's  Mon- 
astery and  Abbey,  xxxviii, 
xxxix  ;  an  early  drawing  of 
altar,  43  ;  .Ethelberht  endows 
the  monastery,  98 ;  Pope  Gre- 
gory's gift  to,  100,  114-126, 
Ixxxix  ;  the  church  burnt  and 
Augustine's  shrine  injured, 
186.  See  also  SS.  Peter  and 
Paul. 

Canterbury,  St.  Martin's  Church, 
St.  Liudhard's  legendary  con- 
nection with,  42  ;  its  ruins 
still  to  be  seen,  44  ;  earliest 
existing    Saxon    church,    no 


portion  of  the  Roman  build- 
ing remaining,  45  ;  the  nave 
and  chancel,  ground  plan,  46  ; 
details,  dates  earlier  than 
Augustine's  mission,  and 
doubtless  erected  by  Liud- 
hard,  47  ;  taken  over  by  the 
mission,  68  ;  wrongly  said 
to  have  been  the  see  of  a 
bishop  suffragan  to  the  Arch- 
bishop, 69  n.  ;  generally  sup- 
posed /Ethelberht  was  bap- 
tized here,  yj. 

Canterbury,  St.  Martin's  Hill,  the 
missionaries  first  view  their 
future  home  from,  65-66,  67. 

Canterbury,  St.  Pancras,  almost 
as  old  as  St.  Martin's,  46,  69  ; 
though  not  mentioned  before 
the  writings  of  Sprott  and 
Thorne,  70  ;  how  Bede  came 
to  overlook  it,  70,  71  ;  said  by 
Thorne  to  have  been  origin- 
ally an  idol  temple,  71  ; 
legendary  handiwork  of  the 
Devil  ;  pagan  origin  of  the 
church  doubted  by  Mickle- 
thwaite,  72  ;  description  of  its 
remains,  72-76 ;  resembles 
St.  Martin's,  but  larger,  77  ; 
probably  many  of  the  things 
said  of  St.  Martin's  by  Bede 
really  apply  to  St.  Pancras, 
the  first  church  built  by  the 
Roman  missionaries  in  Bri- 
tain, Ethelberht  possibly 
baptized  here,  77. 

Canterbury,  SS.  Peter  and  Paul, 
the  body  of  Liudhard  re- 
moved from  St.  Martin's,  42  ; 
intended  for  burying-place  of 
Bishops  of  Canterbury  and 
Kings  of  Kent,  98  ;  its  dedi- 
cation changed  by  Dunstan 
to  St.  Augustine,  the  names 
of  St.  Gregory  and  .St.  Augus- 
tine long  honoured  in  a  Mass 
every  Saturday,  178  ;  the 
burial-place  of  St.  Augustine, 
179,  xciii  ;  rebuilding  of 
under  Abbots  Ailmer,  TElstan, 
180  ;  Wulfric,  1 80-1 81  ;  Egel- 
sin,i8i;  Scotlandus,  181-182  ; 
Wido,  182-186;  not  com- 
pleted at  Augustine's  death, 


INDEX 


437 


and  consecrated  by  Laurence, 
what  it  was  like  unknown, 
212  ;  exempt  from  diocesan 
rule,  xcv ;  burial-place  of 
yEthelberht,  213  ;  his  statue 
there,  xcvi ;  there  St.  Laur- 
ence was  scourged  by  St. 
Peter,  232-233  ;  burial  place 
of  St.  Laurence,  236.  See 
also  St.  Augustine's. 

Canterbury,  Stablegate  (  =  Staple- 
gate),  67. 

Canterbury  before  Dotitesday. 
See  Fausnett  (T.  G.). 

Capgrave,  Nova  Legenda,  236. 

Came,  Sir  Edward,  tablet  to,  in 
S.  Gregorio,  20. 

Carthage,  218. 

Cartidariuni  Saxonicum.  See 
Birch  (W.  de  G.). 

Cassiodorus,  Variae  Epistolae, 
407  n. 

Catalogue  of  Materials  relating 
to  the  History  of  Great  Bri- 
tain.   See  Hardy  (Sir  T.  D.). 

Cearl,  King  of  Mercia  (?  Wessex), 
256. 

Celtic  Church  in  Wales.  See 
Bund  (W.). 

Celtic  Scotland.  See  Skene  TW. 
F.). 

Chalcedon,  200,  217. 

Chalons-sur-Saone,  Bishop  of. 
See  Lupus. 

Charibert,  King  of  Paris,  39. 

Charters  granting  land  to  the 
Church  in  Augustine's  time 
to  be  treated  with  suspicion, 
x.xxvi,  214,  215  ;  proof  of  the 
forgery  of  most  of  them, 
x.xxvii-lxiv. 

Chintila,  King  of  the  Visigoths, 
281,317. 

Chlothaire  ll.,  King  of  Neustria, 
xxxiv,  37,  40,  134,  222,  224, 
308,  309,  310. 

Chlovis  II.,  King  of  Neustria  and 
Burgundy,  308. 

Chosroes,  Shah  of  Persia,  his 
invasion  of  the  Empire,  199  ; 
his  army  advances  to  the 
Bosphorus,  200  ;  invades 
Syria  and  Palestine  and  cap- 
tures Damascus  and  Jerusa-  I 
lem,  captures  Egypt,   enters  j 


Asia  Minor  and  advances  to 
Chalcedon,  217  ;  his  insolent 
letter  to  Heraclius,  assaults 
Constantinople  and  is  beaten, 
218  ;  captured  and  starved 
to  death,  219;  Muhammed's 
letter  to  him  and  his  reply, 
272. 

Christian  Church  in  these  Islands 
before  the  Coming  of  A  ugustine. 
See  Browne  (Bishop). 

Christian  Church  in  the  Middle 
Ages.     Sec  Hardwick  (C). 

Chronicon  Acephalum,  175  n. 

Chronicon  S.  Crucis,  177. 

Chron.  S.  Fauli,  xcvi  n. 

Chronicon   Scotorum,   209,    355- 

357. 
Churton,     E.,     Early     English 

Church,  234. 
Civilisatiofi    in    Europe.       See 

Guizot. 
Clovesho,    Council    of,   xciii,    62, 

177,  193.  194. 

Codex  Diploinaticus.  See  Kemble. 

Coenwulf,  King  of  Mercia,  his 
letter  to  Pope  Leo  ill.,  141. 

Coifi,  259,  260,  261,  327, 

Cologne,  Bishop  of.    6"^^  Cunibert. 

Columba,  xxiv. 

Columban,  xxiv,  166,  319;  his 
letter  to  Gregory,  144,  145, 
1 59-161;  to  Boniface  IV.,  145; 
sent  into  exile  by  Queen 
Brunichildis,  225. 

Constans  11.,  Emperor  of  By- 
zantium, 277,  278,  302,  387. 

Constantina,  Empress,  199. 

Constantine,  eldest  son  of  Herac- 
lius, 277. 

Constantine  Pogonatos,  Emperor, 
389-396. 

Constantinople,  200,  201,  218, 
219. 

Constantinople,  Council  of,  379  n., 
381  n. 

Constantinople,  Papal  Nuncios  at, 
406-427. 

Constantinople,  St.  Sophia,  219. 

Conversion  of  the  Heptarchy. 
See  Browne  (Bishop). 

Corpus  Inscriptionum  Latinorunt, 
201  n. 

Cunibert,  Bishop  of  Cologne,  310. 

Cwichelm,  King  of  Wessex,  257. 


438    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


Dagan,  Bishop,  209. 

Dagobert  I.,  King  of  Austrasia, 
afterwards  King  of  the 
Franks,    309,   310,  311,  319, 

33O)  333- 
Damian,    Bishop    of    Rochester, 

consecrated    to   the    See   by 

Deusdedit   on   the   death   of 

Ithamar,  date   of  his   death 

unknown,  336. 
X.     Scriptores.       See     Twysden 

(Sir  Roger). 
De  Rossi,  Inscript.  Christ.^  239, 

279  n.,  281  n.,  283  n.,  287. 
Desiderius,  Bishop  of  Vienne,  34, 

1 33»  .223,  319- 

Deusdedit,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 183  ;  succeeds  on  the 
death  of  Honorius,  con- 
secrated by  Ithamar,  conse- 
crated Damian  to  Rochester 
on  the  death  of  Ithamar,  336  ; 
his  death  from  the  plague, 
the  See  vacant  for  some 
time,  337  ;  the  last  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  who 
could  trace  his  orders  to 
Augustine,  339. 

Deusdedit,  Pope,  succeeded  Boni- 
face IV.,  restored  the  priests 
to  the  position  that  the  monks 
had  held  under  Gregory  and 
Boniface,  237,  238  ;  dies  and 
is  succeeded  by  Boniface  v., 
238. 

Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiqui- 
ties^ 106  n. 

Dictionary  of  Ciiristian  Bio- 
graphy^ Ixxix,  xcvi  n.,  xcvii  n., 
xcviii  n.,  203  n.,  308  n.,  370  n., 
408  n.,  410  n.,  414,  415  n. 

Dinoot,  Abbot  of  Bangor,  156, 
163. 

Dioscorus,  Pope,  407,  408. 

Dogmas,  history  of  the  origin  and 
development  of,  366-373. 

Dorubrevis.     See  Rochester. 

Dover,  52,  53. 

Down   Ampney,  near   Cricklade, 

^57;  . 
Droctigisilus,  Bishop  of  Soissons, 

41. 
Dubrae.     See  Dover. 
Duchesne,  L.,  Origines  du  Ctdte 

Chritien,  78    n.,   79  n.,   81, 


83  n.,  84  n.,  85,  86  n.,  88  n., 

loi,  107. 
Dudden,  Rev.  F.  Homes,  Gregory 

the  Great,  vii,   17,  18  n.,  113, 

114  n.,  175  n.,  176  n. 
Dugdale,     Sir     W.,    Monastico77, 

xcii  n.,  43,  69  n.,  170  n.,  216, 

236. 
Dumnoc.    See  Dunwich. 
Dunwich,  321,  325. 
Dunwich,  Bishop  of.     See  Boni- 
face (Thomas). 
Durovernum,    Durovernia,  Duro- 

vernis.     See  Canterbury. 

Eadbald,  King  of  Kent,  succeeds 
his  father  ^thelberht,  re- 
fuses to  accept  Christianity, 
marries  his  father's  widow 
Bercta,  230  ;  forsakes  idolatry 
and  is  baptized,  233  ;  recalls 
Mellitus  and  Justus  from 
Gaul,  234  ;  builds  the  church 
of  "the  Holy  Mother  of  God" 
at  Canterbury,  181,  234,  333  ; 
and  St.  Peter's  at  Folkestone, 
235,  333  ;  his  letter  to  Boni- 
face v.,  241  ;  ^dwin  asks 
him  for  his  sister  yEthel- 
berga  in  marriage,  256  ;  on 
^^dwin's  death  he  gives  her 
the  royal  vill  of  Lyminge, 
330  ;  is  mistrusted  by  ^thel- 
berga,  332  ;  his  death  and 
successor,  334. 

Eadfrid,  256,  265,  326. 

Eadmer,  De  reliquiis  S.  Audoeni, 
Ixi,  93,  96,  97,  98. 

Ealdberht,  49 ;  see  also  ^thelberht. 

Eanfleda,  257,  332. 

Eanswitha,  333,  xcix. 

Earconberht,  King  of  Kent,  suc- 
ceeds his  father  Eadbald, 
334  ;  his  death,  probably  from 
the  plague,  337. 

Earle,  J.,  Handbook  to  the  Land 
Charters  and  other  Saxon 
Documents,  xlviii,  xlix  n., 
liii,  liv. 

Early  English  Church.  See 
Churton. 

Early  English  Church  History. 
See  Bright  (Dr.). 

East-Anglian  Kingdom,  extent 
of,  244-245  ;  genealogy  of  its 


INDEX 


439 


kings,  245  ;  its  history  in  the 
time  of  Augustine's  mission, 
246-248. 

Easter,  methods  of  computing 
date  in  British  Church 
differed  from  Roman,  146, 
147  ;  the  various  cycles  in 
use  to  determine  it,  148,  149  ; 
the  Scots  conform  to  the 
Roman  practice,  282. 

Ebbs  Fleet,  60. 

Ecgbercht,  King  of  Kent,  sends 
Wighard  to  Rome  for  ordina- 
tion as  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 337. 

Ecgbert,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, xxxi. 

Ecgbert,  Dialogues^  26  n. 

Ecgbert,  Penitential^  113  n. 

Ecgbert  of  York,  102. 

Ecgric,  King  of  East  Anglia, 
succeeds  Sebert  on  his  re- 
tiral  to  a  monastery,  and  is 
killed  with  him,  323. 

Ecthesis,  the,  294,  295,  296,  301, 
386,  387,  3S8,  389- 

Edlferd  Flesaur.     See  ^thelfrid. 

Edward  the  Confessor,  180. 

Eeni,  King  of  East  Anglia,  245. 

Egelsin,  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 
Canterbury,  181. 

Egelwin,  Abbot  of  Athelney,  190. 

Egila,  223. 

Eleutherius,  Exarch  of  Ravenna, 
238,  239. 

Eligius,  St.,  166. 

Elmham,  Thomas  of,  a  monk  of 
St.  Augustine's  monastery, 
the  author  of  Historia  Mon- 
aster ii  S.  Angus  tint  Cant- 
uarietisis,  treasurer  of  the 
Abbey  1407-14 14,  Prior  of 
Lenton,  Ixxv  ;  left  the  Bene- 
dictines to  join  the  order  of 
Cluny,  thought  to  have 
written  Vita  et  Gesta  Hettrici 
Quinti,  114;  his  list  of  the 
books  sent  by  Gregory  to 
Augustine,  115-123;  the 
sacred  vessels  and  copes, 
124  ;  the  relics,  and  the  gifts 
sent  to  y^ithelberht,  125. 

Elmham,  Thomas  of,  Historia 
Monasterii  S.  August  ini 
Cantuaritfisis.,  xxxviii,  xxxix, 


1,  lii,  liii  n.,  Ixxv,  Ixxvi, 
Ixxxix,  43  n.,  59,  63,  67,  77, 
84,  99,  114  n.,  115  n.,  177, 
212,  214,  233,  235,  236  n., 
242,  245,  330,  334,  335,  336. 

Elstob,  E.,  An  English-Saxon 
Homily  on  the  Birthday  of 
St.  Gregory,  xc  n.,  13  n. 

Elvira,  Council  of,  152. 

Ely,  Thomas  of.  Vita  S.  Aedel- 
dritae,  323. 

English^  The.    .Sf^  Maclear  (Dr.). 

English  Commonwealth.  See 
Palgrave  (Sir  F.). 

Eomer,  257. 

Eormenred,  334. 

Eormenric,  Irminric,  or  Eozmoric, 
the  father  of  ^thelberht, 
50. 

Eorpwald,  King  of  East  Anglia, 
succeeds  his  father,  Redwald, 
248,  318;  persuaded  to  Chris- 
tianity by  ^dwin  of  North- 
umbria,  318  ;  dies  a  violent 
death,  319. 

Ernulf,  Bishop,  Textus  Ro_ffensis, 
liv,  Ixxiv. 

Etaples  (Quentavic),  Augustine's 
probable  port  of  embarka- 
tion, 56. 

Ethelberga.     See  Bertha. 

Ethelred,  King  of  Mercia,  172. 

Eugenius  iv..  Pope,  succeeds 
Martin  I.  on  his  deposition, 
305,  306,  388;  was  his  elec- 
tion legitimate  whilst  Martin 
lived  ?  307. 

Eulogius,  Patriarch  of  Alexandria, 
xxxiii,  5,  87,  89. 

Eusebius,    Life    of    Constantine, 

7- 
Ewald,  P.,  and  Hartmann,  L.  M., 
Gregorys  Letters,  xxxi,  xxxii 
n.,  xxxiii  n.,  xxxiv  n.,  xxxv, 
xxxvi,6n.,  7  n.,8  n.,  gn.,  ion., 
12  n.,  24  n.,  25  n.,  26  n.,  28  n., 
29  n.,  30  n.,  31  n.,  32  n., 
33  n.,34n.,  35  "•,  37  "-,  4°  n., 
88  n.,  89  n.,  100  n.,  loi,  102  n., 
103,  103  n.,  127  n.,  128  n., 
133  n.,  134  n.,  137  n.,  138, 
139  n.,  140  n.,  169  n.,  171  n., 
174  n.,  416  n.,  417  n.,  418  n., 
419  n.,  420  n.,  421  n  ,  422  n., 
423  n.,  424  n.,  426  n. 


440    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


Faussett,  T.  G.,  in  Archaological 
Journal,  Ixxxvi. 

Faussett,  T.  G.,  Canterbury  before 
Domesday,  52,  53,  54,  55,  67. 

Faversham,  54. 

Felire,  210. 

Felix,  Bishop  of  Dunwich,  came 
from  Gaul  to  Britain,  either 
with  Sebert  or  at  his  invita- 
tion, 320,  321  ;  ordained 
bishop  by  Honorius,  321  ; 
probably  used  the  Gaulish 
ritual,  322  ;  assisted  Sebert 
in  founding  a  school  at 
Dunwich,  322-323  ;  his  death, 
burial,  and  translation,  325. 

Florence  of  Worcester,  Chronicon 
ex  Chronicis,  xcix,  177,  245, 
246,  324,  325  n.,  334  n., 
360  n. 

Florentina,  St.,  227,  228. 

Florez,  Espana  Sagrada,  281  n. 

Four  Ancient  Books  of  Wales. 
See  Skene  (VV.  F.). 

Fredegar,  319  n. 

Freeman,  A.  E.,  xcvii  n. 

Fulgentius,  St.,  227. 

Fuller,  Thomas,  230. 

Fursius,  322. 

Gallia  Christiana,  41. 

Gap,  Bishop  of.     See  Arigius. 

Gasquet,  Abbot,  in  the  Tablet, 
loi  n. 

Gaul,  the  Church  in,  xxvi,  xxvii  ; 
authorities  for  history  of 
Merovingian  period  in,  Ixii; 
its  Roman  civilisation  jeopard- 
ised, 3  ;  ceases  to  be  passable 
from  Rome  to  Britain,  3  ;  the 
foster-mother  of  the  Church  in 
Wales  and  Ireland,  5  ;  civil 
war  in,  222-224  ;  state  of  the 
Church  in  early  seventh  cen- 
tury, 308-311. 

Geoffrey  of  Monmouth,  165. 

George  of  Pisidia,  218. 

George,  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, 392. 

Gerard,  Bishop  of  Cambrai,  102, 
109. 

Germanus,  Roman  general,  199. 

Gerona,  Bishop  of.     See  John. 

Gervase  of  Canterbury,  Chronica, 
.xli  n.,  xlii  n. 


Gesta  Pontificum.  See  William 
of  Malmesbury. 

Gibbon,  E.,  Decline  and  Fall  of 
the  Roman  Empire,  edited 
by  Prof.  J.  Bury,  Ixvi,  198, 
199  n.,  200,  344-349- 

Giesler,  205. 

Glenlade,  or  Inlade,  58. 

Gocelin,  Vita  Major  S.  Augustini 
Anglorum  Apostoli,  36,  42, 
63,  84,  8s  n.,  139,  168,  179- 
186,  188,  210,  212,  242. 

G  rati  an,  Deere  tales,  Iviii. 

Gratian,  Dist.  xcv  n. 

Gratiosus,  Abbot  of  SS.  Peter  and 
Paul,  Canterbury,  334. 

Green,  J.  R.,  The  Making  of 
E7tgland,  233  n.,  326,  327  n. 

Gregorovius,  History  of  the  City 
of  Rome  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
201  n.,  204,  206,  207  n., 
237  n.,  238  n.,  244  n.,  283  n., 
284  n.,  285  n.,  286  n.,  288  n., 
289,  293  n. 

Gregory,  Exarch  of  Africa,  299. 

Gregory  I.,  Pope,  St.,  not  techni- 
cally a  monk,  but  essentially 
one,  x ;  fosters  monkish  in- 
dependence of  control,  xviii  ; 
his  letters,  xxxi-xxxvi ;  ques- 
tions of  his  orthodoxy,  xxxi  ; 
meaning  and  results  of  his 
mission  to  Britain,  i  ;  his 
scanty  knowledge  of  Britain, 
4  ;  the  cause  of  his  solicitude 
for  Britain,  his  letter  to 
Eulogius,  5,  6  ;  his  letters  to 
Candidus,  xxxii,  6,  7,  9  ;  to 
Bishop  Januarius,  8  ;  to  Bish- 
op Fortunatus,  9  ;  to  Queen 
Brunichildis,  10 ;  the  Monk 
of  Whitby's  story  of  St. 
Gregory  and  the  Anglian 
slaves,  11-13  ;  the  motive 
that  moved  him  to  send  his 
mission,  his  letter  to  Queen 
Brunichildis,  he  never  refers 
to  Saxons,  only  Anglians, 
14  ;  founds  St.  Andrew's 
Monastery,  16  ;  his  chair, 
feeds  twelve  paupers  every 
morning,  Ixxxix,  21  ;  mention 
of  the  monastery  in  his  letter 
to  Rusticiana,  and  of  miracles 
there,  22-24  ;  selects  Angus- 


INDEX 


441 


tine  to  lead  his  Anglian 
mission,  25  ;  his  letters  to 
Syagrius,  and  to  the  compan- 
ions of  Augustine,  a  doubtful 
letter,  26  ;  strange  that  one 
so  business-like  should  not 
have  included  in  the  mission 
someone  used  to  affairs  and 
no  bishop,  27  ;  his  letter  to 
Stephen,  Abbot  of  Lerins, 
28-30 ;  will  not  hear  of 
Augustine  relincjuishing  the 
mission,  29  ;  sends  Augustine 
back  with  a  letter  to  his  com- 
panions, constituting  him 
abbot,  30  ;  his  letter  to  the 
Bishops  of  Tours  and  Mar- 
seilles, 31  ;  his  letter  to 
Protasius,  32  ;  his  letters  to 
Vergilius,  Archbishop  of 
Aries,  and  to  Arigius,  33  ; 
his  letter  to  Desiderius, 
Bishop  of  Vienne,  and 
Syagrius,  Bishop  of  Autun, 
and  to  Queen  Brunichildis, 
34 ;  to  Queen  Brunichildis, 
88  ;  his  letter  to  Eulogius  tell- 
ing him  of  Augustine's  suc- 
cess, 89  ;  delays  three  years  in 
answering  Gregory's  letter, 
99 ;  sends  several  recruits 
to  the  mission,  books  and 
articles  for  the  service  of  the 
church,  100,  114;  and  replies 
to  Augustine's  questions,  100 ; 
notwithstanding  doubts  of 
some  writers,  this  correspond- 
ence maintained  to  be 
genuine,  10 1  ;  the  arguments 
stated,  102, 103  ;  the  questions 
stated,  with  Gregory's  re- 
sponsions,  104-1 14  ;  an  inter- 
polated question  and  respon- 
sion,  113  n.  ;  the  books  he 
sent  to  Augustine,  11 5- 123; 
the  sacred  vessels,  124  ;  the 
vestments,  xc,  124,  126, 
127  ;  the  relics,  his  gifts 
to  Y^ithelberht,  125  ;  his  letter 
to  Venantius,  127,  128  ; 
his  letter  to  Mellitus,  with 
messages  for  Augustine  and 
^thelberht,  128-130  ;  his 
letters  to  the  various  bishops 
in  Gaul,  asking  succour  for 


Laurence  and  Mellitus  on 
their  return  to  Britain,  132, 
J  33;  alsotoTheodoric,  Theo- 
debert,  and  Queen  Bruni- 
childis, and  to  Chlothaire  II., 
King  of  Neustria,  134;  to 
.•-Ethelberht,  135  ;  and  to 
Queen  Ethelberga  (Bertha), 
136,  137  ;  his  letters  to  Augus- 
tine, 138-143  ;  intended  that 
London  should  be  the 
Metropolitan  See  after  Aug- 
ustine's day,  139-142  ;  his 
correspondence  with  Leander, 
Bishop  of  Seville,  on  the 
sacrament  of  baptism,  150; 
his  intention  to  make  London 
the  Archiepiscopal  See  frus- 
trated by  the  ordination  of 
Laurence  to  Canterbury  to 
succeed  Augustine,  176  ;  died 
the  same  year  as  Augustine, 
177,  198  ;  further  letters  of, 
416,  417,  418,  419,  420,  421, 
422,  423 

Gregory's  Letters.  See  Ewald  and 
Hartmann. 

Gregory  the  Great.  6"^^  Ho  worth 
(Sir  Henry). 

Gregory  the  Great.  See  Dudden 
(Rev.  F.  Homes). 

Gregory  I.,  Pope,  Dialogues,  351, 
352  n. 

Gregory  I.,  Pope,  Epistles.  See 
Barmby. 

Gregory  I.,  Pope,  Magna  Moralia, 
90. 

Gregory,  Bishop  of  Tours,  History 
of  the  Franks,  xxxvi,  Ixvi,  39, 
40,  128,  150,   175,   176  n.,  352 

n.,  353  n-,  354  n. 
Grisar,  H.,  History  of  Rome  and 

the  Popes,  16,  407,  408  n. 
Grisar,  H.,  in  Civilta   Cattolica, 

102  n. 
Grisar,  H.,  Analecta,  281  n.,  403  n. 
Guecha,  King  of  East  Anglia,  245. 
Guizot,  F.  P.  G.,  Civilisation  in 

Europe,  320  n. 
Gundulf,    Bishop    of    Rochester, 

184. 

Had  dan,  A.  W.,  Remaitts,  161, 
162  n.,  166,  195,  196  n., 
234- 


442    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


Haddan,  A.  W.,  and  Stubbs,  W., 
Councils  and  Ecclesiastical 
Documents  relating  to  Great 
Britain,  xxxix,  1,  li,  liii,  Iv  rii, 
Ivi  n.,  Ivii,  Iviii,  lix  n.,  Ixi,  Ixii, 
Ixiii,  Ixiv,  xciii  n.,  xciv  n., 
xcv  n.,  xcviii  n.,  26  n.,  27  n., 
62  n.,  64  n.,  66  n.,  69  n.,  90  n., 
103,  no  n.,  112  n.,  113  n., 
12511.,  15211.,  153,  157,168  n., 
177  n.,   194  n.,  211   n.,  212, 

215  n.,  233  n.,  235  n.,  241, 
321  n. 

Handbook  to  Land  Charters  and 
other  Saxon  Documents.  See 
Earle  (J.). 

Hardwick,  Chas.,  Thomas  of 
Elmham,  xl  n.,  xli  n.,  xlii, 
Ixxv,  xcii,  xcv  n.,  115  n., 
124  n. 

Hardwick,  Chas.,  Christiati 
Church  in  the  Middle  Ages, 

234- 
Hardy,  Sir  T.  D.,  Descriptive 
Catalogue  of  Materials  re- 
latitig  to  the  History  of  Great 
Britain,  etc.,  xcvii  n.,  42  n., 
43  n.,  59  n.,  168  n.,  173  n., 

216  n.,  235   n.,  330,  321    n., 

333  n- 
Harpsfield,  N.,  Historia  Angliana 

Ecclesiastica,  171. 
Hasted,  E.,  Kent,  69  n. 
Hauck,  A.,  Realencyklopddie  fir 

protestantisclie  Theologie  und 

Kirche,  40  n. 
Heathen  feasts,  their  conversion 

into  Christian  festivals,  130- 

132. 
Heathen  temples, the  Pope's  coun- 
sels to  Augustine  how  to  deal 

with  them,  128-130. 
Hefele,  C.  J.  von,  History  of  the 

Councils,    149,    381,    382    n., 

383  n-,  399  n. 

Henry,  Emperor,  180. 

Heraclius,  Exarch  of  Africa,  after- 
wards Emperor  of  Byzantium, 
200 ;  refuses  obedience  to 
Constantinople,  200  ;  defeats 
Phocas  and  is  proclaimed 
Augustus,  201  ;  his  character 
and  genius,  216,  217  ;  his 
attempt  to  secure  peace  with 
the   Persians   at   Chalcedon, 


217  ;  contemplates  moving 
the  capital  to  Carthage,  aided 
by  a  loan  from  the  Church 
starts  a  great  crusade,  218  ; 
and  defeats  the  Persians,  and 
returns  in  triumph,  219;  his 
efforts  for  internal  peace, 
220-222  ;  the  deterioration 
of  his  genius,  269-270  ;  loses 
one-half  of  his  empire  to  the 
Saracens,  270  ;  Muhammed's 
letter  to  him,  and  the  pre- 
sents he  sends  in  return,  272  ; 
his  death,  277  ;  his  attitude 
towards  the  Monophysites, 
378. 

Heraclius,  grandson  of  Heraclius 
the  Emperor.  See  Constans 
II. 

Heraclonas,  277,  278. 

Hickes,  Geo.,  Diss.  Ep.,  1. 

Hilarion,  first  Abbot  of  St.  An- 
drew's, 24. 

Historia  Angliana  Ecclesiastica. 
See  Harpsfield  (N.). 

Historical  MSS.  Covunission, 
36  n. 

History  of  the  Eftglish  Church. 
See  Hunt  (W.). 

History  of  the  Franks.  .See 
Gregory,  Bishop  of  Tours. 

History  of  the  Later  Roman 
Empire.    See  Bury  (Prof.  J.). 

History  of  Rome  and  the  Popes. 
See  Grisar  (H.). 

Hole,  Rev.  C,  in  Dictionary  of 
Christian  Biography,  Ixxix. 

Holmes,  G.  W.,  The  Age  of 
Justinian  and  Theodora,  413, 
414  n. 

Holy  Rood,  captured  by  the  Per- 
sians, 217,  218  ;  restored  by 
Heraclius,  219. 

Hone,  W.,  Year  Book,  131. 

Honorius,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, lix,  Ixviii  ;  succeeds 
Justus,  268,  318  ;  consecrated 
by  Paulinus,  318  ;  he  ordains 
Felix  as  Bishop  of  Dunwich, 
and  sends  him  as  missionary 
to  East  Anglia,  321,  322  ;  at 
Felix's  death  consecrates  his 
deacon  Thomas  to  the  see, 
325  ;  and  at  his  death  ordains 
Berctgils  in  his  place,  326  ; 


INDEX 


443 


sends  Romanus,  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  on  an  embassy  to 
the  Pope,  invites  I'aulinus  to 
become  Bishop  of  Rochester, 
333  ;  on  the  death  of  Pauhnus 
ordains  Ithamar  in  his  place, 
his  death  and  epitaph,  335. 

Honorius,  Pope,  xxiv,  Ixxi  ;  his 
letters  to  Honorius,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  Ixiii, 
Ixxii  ;  succeeds  Boniface 
v.,  239,  278  ;  of  a  noble 
family,  278  ;  his  wise  acts, 
his  epitaph,  279  ;  his  letter 
to  the  Council  of  Toledo,  280, 
317  ;  the  reply  from  Braulio, 
Bishop  of  Saragossa,  280, 28 1 ; 
his  letter  to  the  Scots  of  Ire- 
land, his  part  in  the  Mono- 
thelite  controversy,  282  ;  his 
munificence  in  restoring  the 
churches,  283,  and  in  church 
building,  284-288  ;  founds  a 
monastery  in  his  house  near 
the  Lateran,  his  death,  289  ; 
his  letters  to  Sergius  on  the 
Monophysite  schism,  380- 
404. 

Hook,  Dr.  W.  F.,  Lives  of  the 
Arclibishops  of   Canterbury, 

233- 
Hope,  W.  H.  St.  J.,  Archceologia 
Cajitiana,  70  n.,  72-76,   172- 

173- 
Howorth,    Sir     Henry     H.,     St. 

Gregory  the  Great,  vii,  xxxi, 

Ixxxix,  126,  151,  304. 
Hrofaescaester.     See  Rochester. 
Hugh,  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 

Canterbury,  187. 
Hughes,  Prof.  M'Kenna,  in   The 

Mission  of  Augustine,  Ixxix, 

59- 
Hunt,  W.,  History  of  the  English 
Church,  108  n.,  167  n. 

Ingoberga,  39. 

Inlade.     See  Glenlade. 

Inscript.  Christ.     See  De  Rossi. 

Interpreters,  61. 

lolo  MSS.,  154. 

Ireland,  Church  in,  4  ;  derived 
from  Gaul,  little  or  no  inter- 
course with  Rome  in  sixth 
century,  5. 


Irminric.     See  Eormenric. 
Isaac,    Exarch  of  Ravenna,    278, 

290,  294. 
Isidore,  St.,  Archbishop  of  Seville, 

227,228,314. 
Isidore,      Hispalensis      episcopi, 

Opera,  57  n. 
Ithamar,    Bishop    of    Rochester, 

succeeds  Paulinus,  probably 

the  first  Englishman  made  a 

bishop,  335. 

]a.^6,Kegesfa  Po7ttificum  Roinan- 
orum,  102  n,  280,  290. 

Jafte,  Mon.  Maguntiana,  1 52  n. 

James  the  Deacon,  193,  328,  329. 

James,  Dr.  M.  R.,  Ancient  Lib- 
raries of  Canterbury  and 
DoTcr,  116,  117,  121. 

Janus,  397  n. 

Jerome,  Eps.,  xcviii  n. 

Jerusalem,  taken  by  the  Persians, 
the  Patriarch  carried  into 
captivity,  massacres  there, 
217. 

Jews,  constrained  to  become 
Christians  by  Phocas,  they 
revolt,  200 ;  ransom  Chris- 
tians from  the  Persians  to 
slaughter  them,  217;  Hera- 
clius'  treatment  of  them, 
their  wealth  and  power, 
naturally  aggressive,  221  ; 
massacred  in  Palestine  and 
at  Edessa,  compulsorily  bap- 
tized in  Spain,  222  ;  perse- 
cuted in  Spain  under  Sisebut, 
227  ;  expelled  from  Spain, 
280. 

John,  Abbot  of  Biclaro,  after- 
wards Bishop  of  Gerona,  229. 

John,  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 
99,  236  n. 

John  the  Deacon,  Life  of  St. 
Gregory,  16„  102  n. 

John,  Exarch  of  Ravenna,  238. 

John  II.,  Pope,  407,  408. 

John  III.,  King  of  Portugal,  187. 

John  IV.,  Pope,  succeeds  Sever- 
inus,  between  his  election 
and  consecration  writes  a 
letter  to  the  Scots,  291  ; 
adds  an  oratory  to  the 
Lateran  Baptistery,  292  ;  his 
death  and  burial,  293  ;  took 


444    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


no  part  in  the  disputes  about 
Monothelism,  387. 

Jonas,  Life  of  St.  Bertulf  of 
Bobbie.     See  Migne. 

Justinian's  Code,  8,  109. 

Justus,  first  Bishop  of  Rochester, 
afterwards  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  Ixii,  Ixx,  Ixxi  ; 
one  of  the  recruits  to  the 
mission  sent  in  response  to 
Augustine's  letter  to  the 
Pope,  100,  125  ;  ordained 
Bishop,  169  ;  of  Rochester, 
171  ;  signs  joint  letter  to  the 
Scots,  208-209  ;  and  to  the 
British  bishops,  210;  on  the 
relapse  of  Kent  and  East 
Anglia  to  idolatry,  withdraws 
with  Mellitus  to  Gaul,  232  ; 
recalled  by  Eadbald  on  his 
conversion,  returns  to  Ro- 
chester, 234  ;  a  letter  to  him 
from  Boniface  v.,  240,  242, 
243,  xcvii  ;  on  the  death  of 
Mellitus  he  was  the  only  re- 
maining Roman  bishop  in 
Britain,  and  succeeds  him  as 
Archbishop,  242  ;  he  conse- 
crates Romanus  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  243  ;  sends  him 
on  a  mission  to  Pope  Honor- 
ius,  244 ;  probable  date  of 
his  death,  268,  269  ;  dedica- 
tion to,  xcviii. 

K.C.D.    (i.e.    Kern.    Cod.    Dip), 

157  n.,  171  n. 
Kemble,  J.  M.,  Codex  Diplomaii- 

cus,  xxxvii,  1,  lii,  liii,  Iv,  55  n. 
Kenulf,  King  of  Mercia,  177. 
Kenwalch  or  Coinwalch,  King  of 

Wessex,  324. 
Kingston-under-Barham-Downs, 

54- 

Labbe,  P.,  Councils,  279,  392  n., 
398  n. 

Laodicaea,  Bishop  of.  See  Ana- 
tolius,  St. 

Lateran,  First  Synod  of,  300,  301. 

Laurence,  Nuncio  at  Constanti- 
nople, 416. 

Laurence  the  presbyter,  after- 
wards Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, sent  by  Augustine  on 


a  mission  to  Rome,  xxxiv ; 
brings  back  letters  from  the 
Pope,  XXXV ;  sent  by  Augustine 
to  Rome  to  tell  the  Pope 
that  the  English  had  adopted 
the  faith  and  that  he  had 
been  made  Bishop,  88,  103, 
208  ;  never  received  the  pall, 
so  appointed  no  suftmgans, 
127  ;  ordained  by  Augustine 
to  the  See  of  Canterbury, 
174  ;  this  made  it  difficult  to 
transfer  the  Archiepiscopal 
See  to  London,  176  ;  had 
done  much  to  strengthen  the 
foundations  of  the  Church, 
208  ;  his  letter  to  the  Scots, 
208,  209  ;  and  to  the  British 
Bishops,  210;  a  doubtful 
letter  to  him  from  Pope 
Boniface,  211  ;  on  the  point 
of  withdrawing  from  his 
charge,  spends  the  night  in 
St.  Augustine's  Church,  where 
St.  Peter  appears  to  him,  232, 
and  scourges  him  ;  he  shows 
the  marks  to  Eadbald,  who 
forsakes  idolatry,  his  epitaph, 
233  ;  his  death,  235  ;  and 
burial,  236  ;  fabulous  tales 
of  him,  few  churches  dedi- 
cated to  him,  xcvii. 

Lavisse,  E.,  Histoire  de  France, 
Ixii,  224,  226  n.,  308  n.,  309  n., 
310  n.,  311  n. 

Leander,  St.,  Archbishop  of 
Seville,  150,  227,  228. 

Leclercq,  Dom  H.,  UEspagne 
Chri^tienne,  Ixvi,  229  n.,  299  n., 

317. 
Leland,  J.,  120. 
Lemanae.     See  Lympne. 
Leo  II.,  Pope,  397,  399,  400. 
Leo  III.,  Pope,  27,  177. 
Leo  IX.,  Pope,  180. 
Leontius,  Roman  general,  199. 
Lerins  (St.  Honorat),  28,  29,  30, 

32. 
Letaldus.     See  Liudhard. 
Lethardus.     See  Liudhard. 
Libellus  Synod icus,  291. 
Liber  Diurnus,  Ixv,  205,  238,  291, 

399,  400. 
Liber  Eliensis,  324,  325. 
Liber  Land.^  155. 


INDEX 


445 


Liber  Pontificalts,  Ixiv,  Ixv,  66  n., 
I02  n.,  203,  204,  206  n.,  207, 
237,  238,  239,  244  n.,  279,  283, 
287,  288,  289,  291,  293,  294, 
304, 305  n.,  397,  398,  407,  408, 

415- 

Licerius,  Archbishop  of  Aries,  32. 

Licinius,  Bishop  of  Angers,  133. 

Liebermann,  F.,  Die  Gesetze  der 
Angelsachsen^  214  n. 

Lilla,  thane  to  King  yEdwin,  257. 

Liudhard  (Lethardus  or  Letal- 
dus),  Chaplain  to  Queen 
Bertha,  called  Bishop  of 
Soissons,  40  ;  but  more 
likely  of  Senlis,  41  ;  prob- 
ably a  bishop  z«  partibus, 
seems  to  have  died  before 
Augustine's  arrival,  Gocelin's 
mention  of  him,  42  ;  other 
legends  of  him,  43  ;  no  doubt 
he  built  St.  Martin's  Church, 
47  ;  he  used  the  Gallican 
rite,  48,  108  ;  his  translation 
at  the  rebuilding  of  St.  Aug- 
ustine's Abbey,  182. 

Liuva  II.,  King  of  the  Visigoths, 
226. 

Livett,  in  Arclicpologia  Caiiti- 
ana,  172. 

Livinus,  St.,  the  Apostle  of 
Brabant,  173. 

Lloyd,  J.  E.,  Histo?y  of  IVa/es, 
251  n. 

London,  bishopric  of,  intended  to 
be  Metropolitan  after  Augus- 
tine's death,  in  place  of 
Canterbury,  139,  141,  142  ; 
and  to  include  the  Welsh 
dioceses,  144 ;  Mellitus  or- 
dained Bishop  of,  169  ;  Laui"- 
ence's  ordination  to  the  See 
of  Canterbury  prevented  the 
removal  of  the  Archiepiscopal 
See  to  London,  176. 

London,  Bishop  of.    See  Mellitus. 

London,  St.  Paul's  Cathedral, 
built  by  ^thelberht,  not  a 
trace  of  this  building  existing, 
said  to  have  been  founded  on 
the  site  of  a  temple  of  Diana, 
always  referred  to  its  patron 
saint  and  not  as  other  cathe- 
drals to  the  city,  170. 

Luna,  Bishop  of.     See  Venantius. 


Lupus,  Bishop  of  Chalons-sur- 
Saone,  133. 

Lyminge,the  first  nunnery  amongst 
Saxons  or  Anglians  founded 
here,  330  ;  Saxon  church  at, 

331,  332. 
Lympne,  52,  53. 

Lyons,  Bishop  of.     See  ^therius. 
Lyons,  Council  of,  194. 

Mabillon,    J.,    Annaies    Ordinis 

S.  Benedieii,  150,  166,  167  n. 

Macarius,  Patriarch   of  Antioch, 

393- 

Maclean,  Rev.  C.  F.,  in  Dictionary 
of  Christian  Biography,  Ixxix. 

Maclear,  Dr.  G.  F.,  The  English, 
262. 

Macray,  A  finals  of  the  Bodleian 
Library,  121. 

Maestrich,  Bishop  of.  See  Aman- 
das,  St. 

Magh  Lene,  Synod  of,  282. 

Mann,  Father,  H.  K.,  Lives  of  the 
Popes  of  the  Early  Middle 
Ages,  xlvii,  Ixv,  Ixxxix,  276  n., 
277  n.,  281  n.,  304  n.,  381  n. 

Mansi,  Iviii  n.,  xciv  n.,  xcv,  1 13  n., 
297  n.,  386  n. 

Marriage,  degrees  of  consan- 
guinity in  which  permissible, 
1 09,  III. 

Marseilles,  29,  32. 

Marseilles,  Bishop  of.  5(?^Serenus. 

Martin,  Bishop  of  Tours,  31. 

Martin  I.,  Pope,  xxiv,  Ixv;  succeeds 
Theodore,  was  he  consecrated 
without  Imperial  confirma- 
tion? 298  ;  calls  the  first  Lat- 
eran  Council,  300,  301,  388, 
404  ;  a  fresh  Pope  appointed 
in  his  place,  302,  388  ;  he 
is  tried  for  political  in- 
trigues and  sent  into  exile, 
his  death,  303  ;  his  deposition 
discussed,  304-308  ;  his  letter 
to  Amandus,  Bishop  of  Maes- 
trich, 307,  308. 

Martyrology  of  Donegal,  210. 

Mason,  A.  J.,  Canon,  The  Mission 
of  Augustine  to  England, 
Ixxviii,  13,  64,  66  n.,  179, 
192  n.,  193  n.,  194  n.,  213, 268, 

341,  342. 
Maurice,  Emperor,  198,  199,  201. 


446    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


Maximian,  Abbot  of  St.  Andrew's, 
25. 

Maximus,  St.,  299,  300. 

Melantius,  Bishop  of  Rouen,  133 

Mellitus,  first  Bishop  of  London, 
xxxv,xxxvi;  one  of  the  recruits 
of  the  mission  sent  in  response 
to  Augustine's  letter  to  the 
Pope,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
London,  100,  125  ;  never  re- 
ceived the  pall,  so  consecrated 
no  suffragans,  127,  xcvii  ; 
Gregory's  letter  to  him,  128- 
130  ;  ordained  Bishop  of  the 
East  Saxons,  whose  metro- 
polis was  London  169  ;  had 
probably  little  influence  out- 
side King  Saberct's  Court, 
191  ;  joins  in  the  letter  of 
Laurencius  to  the  Scots, 
208-209  ;  and  to  the  British 
bishops,  said  to  have  gone  to 
Rome  to  confer  with  Pope 
Boniface,  210;  but  doubtful, 
211,  212;  is  banished  for 
refusing  the  Eucharist  to  the 
unbaptized  kings,  231  ;  with- 
draws to  Gaul,  232  ;  recalled 
byEadbaldon  his  conversion, 
but  rejected  by  the  people  of 
London,  probably  lived  after 
at  Canterbury,  where  he  con- 
secrated the  church  Eadbald 
had  built,  234,  241  ;  Boniface 
I v.'s  letter  to  him,  240, 24 1 ;  his 
prayers  stay  a  fire  at  Canter- 
bury, his  death,  miracles  at 
his  tomb,  never  received  the 
pall,  his  epitaph,  242,  xcii  ; 
relics  of  him,  xcvii  ;  legend 
connecting  him  with  the 
foundation  of  Westminster 
Abbey,  xci. 

Menas,  Bishop  of  Toulon,  133. 

Metz,  Bishop  of.  See  Agilfus, 
Arnulf. 

Micklethwaite,  Mr.,  Ixxx,  69. 

Micklethwaite,  Mr.,  in  Archceo- 
logical  Journal^  44,  45,  72, 
93,  94,  95,  97,  98,  264,  332. 

Migne,  J.  P.,  Patrologia^  Latin 
series,  278  n.,  282  n.,  369  n. 

Migne,  J.  P.,  Patrologia,  Greek 
series,  299  n. 

Mildred,  St.,  330,  331, 


Milman,  H.  H.,  Dean,  Annals  oj 
St.  PauPs  Cathedra/,  170  n. 

Minster,  62. 

Mission  of  St.  Augustine  to 
England.  See  H  ughes  ( P  rof. ), 
Mason  (Canon),  Oman  (Prof.), 
and  Wilson  (Rev.  H.  A.). 

Mommsen,  Th.,  102  n. 

Monasticism,  not  of  Christian 
origin,  xi  ;  its  central  idea,  xii, 
xiii  ;  the  evolution  of  the  mon- 
astery from  the  hermitage, 
xiii  ;  regulation  of  the  life  of 
the  community,  xiv  ;  the 
Benedictine  Rule,  xv ;  the 
varied  labour  in  monastic  life, 
XV,  xvi  ;  the  independence  of 
each  monastery  leads  to  lax- 
ity of  discipline  in  some,  xvii  ; 
the  best  remedy  episcopal 
visitation,  always  objected  to 
by  the  monks,  xviii  ;  this 
tended  to  destroy  the  ideal  of 
church  polity,  xix  ;  the  mon- 
astic theory  of  the  surrender 
of  the  will  of  the  monk  to  his 
abbot  spreads  to  the  laity,  xix. 

Monk  of  Whitby,  the,  Ixvi,  11-13, 

335- 

Monothelism,  220,  221,  277,  290, 
294,  296,  297,  301,  366-405. 

Montalembert,  C.  F.  R.,  Monks 
of  the  West,  41. 

Monumenta  Germanics  Historical 
xcvi. 

MonumentaHisioricaBritanniccE, 
xcvii  n.,  49  n.,  50  n.,  57  n., 
245  n.,  246  n.,  249  n.,  250  n., 
256  n.,  257  n.,  320  n.,  325  n., 
334  n. 

Muhammed,  his  letters  to  Hera- 
clius,  Chosroes,  and  the  King 
of  Abyssinia,  his  death, 
272. 

Muhammedanism,  derived  largely 
from  the  Jewish  religion,  270  ; 
the  rewards  it  promised  to  its 
followers,  its  war  against  the 
Empire  encouraged  by  the 
Jews,  271-272  ;  its  conquests 
in  Syria,  Mesopotamia,  Persia, 
273  ;  and  Egypt,  the  political 
and  economical  eftect  of  its 
conquests,  274  ;  its  effect 
upon   the  Papacy,    275-276; 


INDEX 


447 


Father   Mann's   remarks   on 
this  effect,  276  n.,  277  n. 
Murray's  Yorkshire,  267  n. 

Narses,  199. 

Nalhanael,  Abbot  of  SS.  Peter  and 

Paul,  Canterbury,  356  n. 
Nennius,  49,  50,  57  n.,  245,  249, 

263,  326  n. 
Nicasa,  Council  of,  112,   146,  147, 

^75- 

Northumbria,  its  inhabitants  and 
extent,  its  dialects,  248  ;  two 
divisions,  Baernicia  and 
Deira,  its  early  rulers,  249. 

Nothelm,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, xxxi,  Ixviii,  102. 

Nova  Legenda.     See  Capgrave. 

Oecumenical   Council  (6th),  390- 

404. 
Olympius,    Exarch    of  Ravenna, 

302. 
Oman,  Prof.   C.    W.    C,   in    The 

Mission  of  Augustine,  Ixxviii. 
Omar,  Khalif,  273. 
Onuphrius  Panvinus,  203. 
Origines  du  Culte  Chretien.     See 

Duchesne. 
Orleans,  Council  of,  194. 
Osfrid,  256,  265,  326,  332. 
Oswald,  332. 

Palgrave,  Sir    Francis,  The  Rise 

and  Progress  of  the  English 

Commomvealth,  Ixxv  n.,  153, 

156,  157  n. 

Pall  or  pallium,  the,  126-127,  I39- 

Paris,  Bishop  of.     See  Simplicius, 

133- 

Paul  the  Deacon,  12.  13,  202  n., 
207  n. 

Paul,  Exarch  of  Ravenna,  294, 
296,  302. 

Paulinus,  Bishop  of  York,  Ixvi, 
Ixviii,  Ixix  ;  one  of  the  re- 
cruits to  the  mission  sent  in 
response  to  Augustine's  letter 
to  the  Pope,  100,  125  ;  prob- 
ably accompanied  Redvvald 
to  East  Anglia  on  the  King's 
return  from  a  visit  to  yEthel- 
berht,  246  ;  appears  to  ^dwin 
in  a  vision,  251  ;  consecrated 
bishop  by  Justus  and  accom- 


panies y^thelberga  to  the 
Court  of  ^dwin,  257;  baptizes 
Eanfleda,  yEdwin's  daughter, 
and  eleven  families,  258  ; 
he  reminds  yEdwin  of  his 
vision,  who  consults  his  coun- 
sellors before  embracing 
Christianity,  259-261  ;  con- 
fused by  some  writers  with 
Run,  263,  xcviii  ;  continues 
preaching  in  Northumbria 
with  great  success  during 
yledwin's  reign,  265,  266, 
327  ;  churches  he  built,  and 
crosses  commemorating  his 
preaching,  266-268  ;  conse- 
crates Honorius  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  318  ;  leaves 
Northumbria  at  yEdwin's 
death  and  accompanies  the 
Queen  back  to  Kent,  329  ; 
at  the  death  of  Romanus  is 
appointed  to  the  see  of  Ro- 
chester, },2)Z  ;  his  death,  334  ; 
burial  and  translation,  335. 

Pearson,  C.  H.,  History  of  E7ig- 
land  during  the  Early  and 
Middle  Ages,  247  n. 

Pecham,  Robert,  talalet  to,  in  S. 
Gregorio,  20. 

Peers,  C.  R.,  in  Archaological 
fourjial,  47,  73-76,  330,  331, 
332  n. 

Pelagius,  Bishop  of  Tours,  31,  36. 

Pelagius  i.,  Nuncio  at  Constanti- 
nople, afterwards  Pope,  12, 
408,  412,  413,  414,  415,  416. 

Penda,  King  of  Mercia,  his  inva- 
sion of  East  Anglia,  323,  326  ; 
and  of  Wessex,  324. 

Pepin,  223,  309,  310. 

Percival,  H.  R.,  The  Seven  CEcu- 
inetiical  Councils,  368  n.,  369 
n.,  390  n.,  392  n.,  394  n.,  395 
n.,  396  n.,  398  n.,  399  n.,  402 
n. 

Persia.     See  Chosroes. 

Pertz,  109  n. 

Peter  of  Blois,  xl  n.,  xli. 

Peter  the  monk,  afterwards  first 
abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 
sent  to  Rome  by  Augustine 
to  inform  the  Pope  of  the 
adoption  of  the  faith  by  the 
English,  88,  103  ;  first  abbot 


448    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


of  St.  Augustine's,  went  on  a 
mission  to  Gaul  and  was 
drowned,  buried  at  Boulogne, 

99- 

Petronius,  Abbot  of  SS.  Peter  and 
Paul,  Canterbury,  334,  336  n. 

Phocas,  Emperor  of  Byzantium, 
his  cruelties,  198,  199  ;  con- 
strains the  Jews  to  become 
Christians,  200  ;  a  monument 
erected  at  Rome  in  his 
honour,  his  complacency 
towards  the  Popes,  he  is 
defeated  by  Heraclius  and 
executed,  201  ;  said  to  have 
conferred  on  the  Pope  the 
title  of  Universal  Bishop,  205  ; 
gives  the  Pantheon  to  Boni- 
face IV.  for  Christian  wor- 
ship, 207. 

Pitra,  Cardinal,  Ixxxix. 

Plague.     See  Bubonic  Plague. 

Plummer,  C.    See  Bede,  edited  by. 

Pont  de  Se,  36. 

Procopius,  his  fantastic  fables 
about  Britain,  4. 

Protadius,  Mayor  of  the  Palace 
under     Queen     Brunichildis, 

--.3- 
Protasius,  Bishop  of  Aix,  29. 

Ptolemy,  53. 

Pyrrhus,  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, 294-295. 

Quartodecimans,  146,  147. 
Quenburga,  256,  265. 
Quentavic.     See  Etaples. 

Racuulfe.     See  Reculvers. 

Raegenhere,  247,  253. 

Raine,  Canon,  in  Dictiotiary  of 
Christian  Biography^  Ixxix, 
xcviii  n. 

Raine,  Historiaiis  of  York,  xcviii. 

Ravenna,  Exarch  of,  201,  202. 

Reccared,  King  of  the  Visigoths, 
226. 

Reculver,  xciii,  53,  55,  58,  68,  90. 

Redwald,  King  of  East  Anglia, 
said  to  have  been  converted 
to  Christianity  in  Kent,  51  ; 
the  fourth  Bretwalda,  245  ; 
extent  of  his  kingdom,  place 
of  his  capital,  he  combined 
Christian  worship  with  idol- 


atry, visits  vtthelberht  and 
may  have  taken  Paulinus 
back  with  him,  246  ;  shelters 
yEdwin,  King  of  Deira,  re- 
fuses to  betray  him  to 
yEthelfrid,  247,  251  ;  whom 
he  marches  against,  defeats 
and  kills,  247,  253  ;  date  of 
his  death  unknown,  248  ; 
Bede's  account  of  his  treat- 
ment of /Edwin,  250-252  ;  at 
his  death,  Eorpwald  succeeds, 
318. 

Regulbium.     See  Reculver. 

Relics  sent  by  Gregory  to  Augus- 
tine, 125. 

Reptacestir.     See  Richborough. 

Retesborough.    See  Richborough. 

Rhys,  Sir  John,  Celtic  Britain^ 
130  n.,  163,  249  n. 

Richborough,  52,  53,  54,  58  ;  the 
probable  landing-place  of 
St.  Augustine,  59,  xc ; 
probable  place  of  conference 
with  yEthelberht,  63. 

Ritupis.     See  Richborough. 

Rivington,  Luke,  379  n, 

Rochester,  Justus  ordained  bishop, 
171  ;  the  various  names  by 
which  it  has  been  called, 
sacked  by  Ethelred  of 
Mercia,  172  ;  the  church 
that  ^:thelberht  built  there, 
172-173  ;  Romanus  conse- 
crated bishop,  243. 

Rochester,  Bishop  of.  See  Justus, 
Gundulf,  Romanus,  Paulinus, 
Damian,  Theodore. 

Rochester  Cathedral,  Justus  or- 
dained bishop,  171  ;  remains 
of  the  original  building  built 
by  /Ethelberht,  172-173  ;  un- 
known how  staff  was  con- 
stituted, 173  ;  its  close 
dependence   on    Canterbury, 

243- 

Rofa.     See  Rochester. 

Roiti.     See  Rochester. 

Romanus,  Bishop  of  Rochester, 
243  ;  sent  by  Justus  on  a 
mission  to  Pope  Honorius, 
and   drowned    on    the   way, 

244,  333- 
Rome,  Caelian  Hill,  the,  15. 
Rome,  Palatine,  the,  17. 


INDEX 


449 


Rome,  Pantheon,  206-208. 

Rome,  Phocas'  Monument,  201. 

Rome,  St.  Andrew's  Monastery, 
afterwards  St.  Gregory's, 
15,  16,  17-27,  29,  69,  71, 
169,  172,  193;  chapel  of 
St.  Andrew,  21,  23  ;  chapel 
of  S.  Barbara,  21  ;  chapel  of 
SS.  Giovanni  e  Paolo,  16 ; 
chapel  of  S.  Silvia,  21. 

Rossi,  Inscriptiones  Christianae, 
27()  n. 

Rouen,  Bishop  of.    See  Melantius. 

Routlege,  Canon,  in  Archceologia 
Cantiana,  73-76. 

Rufinianus,  afterwards '  abbot  of 
St.  Augustine's,  one  of  the 
recruits  to  the  mission  sent 
in  response  to  Augustine's 
letter  to  the  Pope,  100,  125, 
236  n. 

Rusticiana,  a  lady  in  Constanti- 
nople, Gregory's  letter  to, 
22-24. 

Rutupiae.     See  Richborough. 

Sabercht.     See  Sebert. 

Sabinianus,  Pope,  202,  422  ;  his 
rule,  202-203 ;  favours  the 
priests  rather  than  the  monks, 
238  ;  successively  Nuncio 
at  Constantinople,  416,  417, 
418,  419,  420  ;  Bishop  of 
Jadera,'42i,  422;  and  Calli- 
polis,  422. 

Sacred  vessels  sent  by  Gregory  to 
Augustine,  100,  123-124,  127. 

Saracens.    See  Muhammedanism. 

Saragossa,  Bishopof.    .S^t'Braulio. 

Sardican  Council,  149. 

Scotlandus,  or  Scollandus,  Abbot 
of  St.  Augustine's,  Canter- 
bury, 181-182,  188. 

Sebert  or  Sabercht,  King  of  the 
East  Saxons  50,  51,  169; 
said  to  have  built  monastery 
of  St.  Peter's  on  Thorney 
Islandjhis  tomb  in  the  present 
abbey,  171  ;  at  his  death, 
leaves  his  three  sons  as  his 
heirs,  231,  xcvi  ;  who  fell 
together  in  battle,  232. 

Serenus,  Bishop  of  Marseilles,  31, 

133. 
Sergius,  Patriarch   of  Constanti- 

29 


nople,  201,  218,  220,  378' 
380,  393. 

Severianus,  227. 

Severinus,  Pope,  succeeds  Honor- 
ius,  his  career  short  and 
troubled,  290  ;  his  character 
and  death,  291  ;  took  no  part 
in  the  disputes  about  Mono- 
thelism,  387. 

Seville,  Archbishops  of.  See 
Leander,  Isidore. 

Seville,  Archiepiscopal  library, 
228,  229. 

Shahan,  Persian  general,  117. 

Sigeberht  of  East  Anglia  suc- 
ceeds his  brother  Eorpwald, 
a  learned  and  Christian  man, 
received  the  faith  in  Gaul, 
319  ;  his  pedigree,  xcviii  ; 
brings  Felix  to  England,  321  ; 
founds  a  school  at  Dunwich, 
322,  323  ;  retires  from  the 
world  and  enters  a  monas- 
tery, is  withdrawn  from  the 
monastery  to  lead  his 
people  against  Penda's  in- 
vasion and  is  killed,  323. 

Silverius,  Pope,  409,  410,  411. 

Simplicius,  Bishop  of  Paris,  133. 

Sisenand,  King  of  the  Visigoths, 

.  .  313,  314,  317- 
Sisibut,   King  of   the  Visigoths, 

222,  226,  227,  312. 
Skene,    W.    F.,    Four    Ancient 

Books  of  Wales,  250  n. 
Skene,  Celtic  Scotland,  326  n. 
Slave  traffic,  xxxii,  6-10. 
Slavonians,  220. 
Soissons,  37. 
Soissons,  Bishop  of.     See  Drocti- 

gisilus. 
Solinus,  Polyhistoriae,  57  n. 
Sorcery,  62. 
Spain,  the  Church  in,  xxvii,  xxviii ; 

authorities     for     history     of, 

Ixii  ;     the     state    of,    during 

Augustine's    time,    226-230  ; 

in    the    time     of    his    early 

successors,  312-317. 
Spelman,    Sir    Henry,    Concilia, 

xlviii. 
Spelman,    Sir     Henry,    Archceo- 

logus,  Ixi. 
Sprott,  Thomas,  Chronica,  .xxxix 

li,  Ixxvi,  41,  70,  125. 


45 o    SAINT  AUGUSTINE  OF  CANTERBURY 


Stanley,  A.  P.,  Dean,  Historical 

Memorials  of  Canterbury,  60, 

67,  72,  98. 
Statius,  Silv.y  201  n. 
Statutes  of  St.  Paul  s,  171. 
Stokes,   Tripartite  Life,  129  n., 

150  n. 
Stour,  river,  57,  58. 
Stourmouth,  57. 
Stubbs,  Bishop  W.,  in  Dictionary 

of  Christian  Biography,  Ixxix, 

xcvi,  xcvii  n. 
Suinthila,  King  of  the  Visigoths, 

313,314,315- 
Swale,  river,  77. 
Syagrius,  Bishop  of  Autun,  xxxiii, 

xxxiv,  25,  26,  34. 

Tablet,  the,  Abbot  Gasquet  in, 
loi  n. 

Terenanus,  Archbishop  of  Ar- 
magh, 210. 

Tertullian,  De  Bapt.,  86  n. 

Tertullian,  De  Pallio,  126  n. 

Textus  Ro^ensis.  See  Ernulf, 
Bishop. 

Thanet,  Island  of,  place  of 
Augustine's  landing,  many 
differences  of  opinion  as  to 
exact  spot,  57  ;  other  names 
in  early  writers,  57  n.  ;  the 
missionaries  at  first  ordered 
by  ^thelberht  to  remain 
there,  61. 

Theodebert,  King  of  Burgundy, 

34,  35,  134,  223. 
Theodora,  Empress,  409,  413. 
Theodore,     Archbishop      of 

Canterbury,  Ixiv,  179,  197, 
336. 

Theodore,  Archbishop,  Peniten- 
tial, 62. 

Theodore  (Calliopas),  Exarch  of 
Ravenna,  294,  302. 

Theodore,  Pope,  succeeds  John 
IV.,  his  parentage,  293 ;  events 
of  his  reign,  294 ;  his  opposi- 
tion to  Monothelism,  294, 
387  ;  the  churches  he  built, 
297  ;  his  death,  298. 

Theodoric,  King  of  Austrasia,  17, 

35,  134,223. 
Theodosia,  Empress,  408. 
Theophanes,    Historia,    294    n., 

350  n. 


Thomas,  Bishop  of  Dunwich, 
325,  326. 

Thorne,  William,  Chronica,  xxxix, 
Ivi,  Ixxvi,  xcvi  n.,  13,  41,  43  n., 
59,  60  n.,  67,  70,  71,  72,  90. 
115,  117,  124,  171,  177,  186, 
187,  235. 

Tidil.     See  Tytil. 

Tighernac,  326  n. 

Titil.     See  Tytil. 

Todd,  J.  H.,  St.  Patrick,  150  n. 

Toledo,  Council  of,  280,  314-317. 

Tonsure,  the,  the  divergence  be- 
tween the  British  use  and 
the  Roman,  149  ;  in  confer- 
ence with  the  British  bish- 
ops Augustine  concedes  the 
question  of,  164  ;  a  plate 
in  Mabillon  illustrating  the 
difference,  166. 

Toulon,  Bishop  of.     See  Menas. 

Tours,  31. 

Tours,  Bishop  of.  See  Gregory, 
Martin,  Pelagius. 

Twine,  T,,  De  Rebus  Albion., 
58  n. 

Twysden,  Sir  Roger,  Historiae 
Anglicanae,  Scriptores  X., 
171. 

Typus,  the,  297,  301,  302,  303, 
386,  387,  388,  389. 

Tytil,  King  of  East  AngHa,  245. 

Uffa,  King  of  East  Anglia,  245. 

Valentinian  ill.,  17. 

Valentio,  Abbot  of  St.  Andrew's, 

24. 
Vatican  Council,  403. 
Vecta.     See  Guecha. 
Venantius,  Bishop  of  Luna,  127. 
Vergilius,    Archbishop    of  Aries, 

32,33,  87,  112,  132. 
Vestments  sent    by   Gregory    to 

Augustine,  100,  124,  126-127, 

xc. 
Vienne,    Bishop    of.     See    Desi- 

derius. 
Vigihus,  Pope,  407,  409,  410,  411, 

412. 
Vigilius,  Pope,  Co7ist.  pro.  dam., 

369  n. 
Vincent    of    Lerins,     Commoni- 

torium,  369. 
Vita  Sancti  Cuthberti,  360  n. 


INDEX 


451 


Vitalian,  Pope,  26,  338. 
Vuffa.     See  Uffa. 
Vuscfrean,  332. 

Wales,  Church  in,  4  ;  derived 
from  Gaul,  little  or  no  inter- 
course with  Rome  in  sixth 
century,  5. 

Wanley,  H.,  Librorum  Vet.  Sept. 
Catalogue.,  116,  120. 

Wanley,  H.,  in  Hickes'  Thesau- 
rus., 119. 

Wantsum,  57,  58. 

Westminster,  Monastery  of  St. 
Peter's,  said  to  have  been 
built  by  Sebert,  his  tomb 
there,  171,  xci. 

Westwood,  Prof.,  Palceographia 
Sacra,  "  Psalter  of  Augus- 
tine," 116,  118,  119,  121. 

Wharton,  Henry,  Aitglia  Sacra, 
xliii,  xlvi  n.,  36,  325. 

Whitaker,  T.  D.,  Loidis  and 
Elinete,  266  n. 

Wido,  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 
Canterbury,  182-186. 

Wighard,  elected  to  succeed 
Deusdedit  as  Archbishop, 
goes  to  Rome  for  consecra- 
tion, 337  ;  and  dies  there  of 
the  plague,  338. 

Wilfred,  St.,  20. 

Wilk,  Cone,  inter  Const.  Lanfr., 
xciv  n. 

William    of    Malmesbury,    Gcsta 


Pontificutn,  Iviii,  Ix,  xcix,  27, 

172,  212,  243,  325  n. 
William  the  Conqueror,  182. 
Willis,    Prof.     R.,    Architectural 

History     of     Cathedral    of 

Canterbuiy,  93,  94,  96,  97  n. 
Wilson,     Rev.     H.    A.,    in    The 

Mission  of  Augustine,  Ixxix, 

66  n.,  151,  152,  192-194. 
Witteric,  King   of  the  Visigoths, 

226. 
Wolsey,  Cardinal,  187. 
Wright,  Biog.  Britt.,  xci  n. 
Wuffa.     See  Uffa. 
Wulfric,  Abbot  of  St.  Augustine's, 

Canterbury,  1 80-1 81. 
Wuscfrea,  265. 
Wyatt,  E.  G.  P.,  Memoir  on  St. 

Gregory  and  the  Gregorian 

Music,  xc. 

Yffi,  332. 

York,  created  a  Metropolitan 
See,  139  ;  intended  to  govern 
twelve  dioceses,  140. 

York,  Bishop  of.     See  Paulinus. 

York  Minster,  the  first  church 
(wooden)  on  its  site,  262  ;  the 
first  stone  church  commenced 
by  yEdwin  and  finished  by 
Oswald,  263  ;  its  remains  dis- 
covered, 264. 

Zacharias,  Pope,  102,  109,  152, 
176. 


Frinted  by  MoRKisoN  &  (iiBB  Limited,  Edinburgh 


937.42 
II3452 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


0035519282 


PHOTOCOPY  ^ 


A,  1357 

DECl    1355 


